This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare perioperative and oncologic outcomes in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) treated with robotic-assisted surgery versus open laparotomy. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies up to June 15, 2024, were identified using PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar. Additionally, reference lists of included studies, relevant review articles, and clinical guidelines were manually searched. The primary outcomes evaluated were length of stay, 90-day mortality, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), and Post-pancreatectomy haemorrhage (PPH). Secondary outcomes included estimated blood loss, reoperation rate, lymph node yield, and operative time. The final analysis included 10 retrospective cohort studies involving 23,272 patients (2,179 robotic-assisted and 21,093 open surgery). There were no significant differences between the two procedures in terms of postoperative pancreatic fistula, Post-pancreatectomy haemorrhage, lymph node yield, and operative time. However, patients undergoing robotic-assisted surgery had shorter lengths of stay, lower 90-day mortality, and less estimated blood loss compared to those undergoing open surgery. The reoperation rate was higher for the robotic-assisted group. Robotic-assisted surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is safe and feasible. Compared to open surgery, it offers better perioperative and short-term oncologic outcomes, but with a higher risk of reoperation.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use has been investigated as a modifiable risk factor for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). This study comprises a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the impact of perioperative NSAID use on rates of POPF after PD.
METHODS: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020-compliant systematic review was performed. Pooled mean differences (MD), odds ratios (OR), and risk ratios with 95% CIs were calculated.
RESULTS: Seven studies published from 2015 to 2021 were included, reporting 2851 PDs (1372 receiving NSAIDs and 1479 not receiving NSAIDs). There were no differences regarding blood loss (MD -99.40 mL; 95% CI, -201.71 to 2.91; P = .06), overall morbidity (OR 1.05; 95% CI, 0.68-1.61; P = .83), hemorrhage (OR 2.35; 95% CI, 0.48-11.59; P = .29), delayed gastric emptying (OR 0.98; 95% CI, 0.60-1.60; P = .93), bile leak (OR 0.68; 95% CI, 0.12-3.89; P = .66), surgical site infection (OR 1.02; 95% CI, 0.33-3.22; P = .97), abscess (OR 0.99; 95% CI, 0.51-1.91; P = .97), clinically relevant POPF (OR 1.18; 95% CI, 0.84-1.64; P = .33), readmission (OR 0.94; 95% CI, 0.61-1.46; P = .78), or reoperation (OR 0.82; 95% CI, 0.33-2.06; P = .68). NSAID use was associated with a shorter hospital stay (MD -1.05 days; 95% CI, -1.39 to 0.71; P < .00001).
CONCLUSIONS: The use of NSAIDs in the perioperative period for patients undergoing PD was not associated with increased rates of POPF.

Pancreatic leaks occur when a disruption in the pancreatic ductal system results in the leakage of pancreatic enzymes such as amylase, lipase, and proteases into the abdominal cavity. While often associated with pancreatic surgical procedures, trauma and necrotizing pancreatitis are also common culprits. Cross-sectional imaging, particularly computed tomography, plays a crucial role in assessing postoperative conditions and identifying both early and late complications, including pancreatic leaks. The presence of fluid accumulation or hemorrhage near an anastomotic site strongly indicates a pancreatic fistula, particularly if the fluid is connected to the pancreatic duct or anastomotic suture line. Pancreatic fistulas are a type of pancreatic leak that carries a high morbidity rate. Early diagnosis and assessment of pancreatic leaks require vigilance and an understanding of its imaging hallmarks to facilitate prompt treatment and improve patient outcomes. Radiologists must maintain vigilance and understand the imaging patterns of pancreatic leaks to enhance diagnostic accuracy. Ongoing improvements in surgical techniques and diagnostic approaches are promising for minimizing the prevalence and adverse effects of pancreatic fistulas. In this pictorial review, our aim is to facilitate for radiologists the comprehension of pancreatic leaks and their essential imaging patterns.

BACKGROUND: Central pancreatectomy is a surgical procedure for benign and low-grade malignant tumors which located in the neck and proximal body of the pancreas that facilitates the preservation of pancreatic endocrine and exocrine functions but has a high morbidity rate, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness between minimally invasive central pancreatectomy (MICP) and open central pancreatectomy (OCP) basing on perioperative outcomes.
METHODS: An extensive literature search to compare MICP and OCP was conducted from October 2003 to October 2023 on PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Fixed-effect models or random effects were selected based on heterogeneity, and pooled odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.
RESULTS: A total of 10 studies with a total of 510 patients were included. There was no significant difference in POPF between MICP and OCP (OR = 0.95; 95% CI [0.64, 1.43]; P = 0.82), whereas intraoperative blood loss (MD = - 125.13; 95% CI [- 194.77, -55.49]; P < 0.001) and length of hospital stay (MD = - 2.86; 95% CI [- 5.00, - 0.72]; P = 0.009) were in favor of MICP compared to OCP, and there was a strong trend toward a lower intraoperative transfusion rate in MICP than in OCP (MD = 0.34; 95% CI [0.11, 1.00]; P = 0.05). There was no significant difference in other outcomes between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: MICP was as safe and effective as OCP and had less intraoperative blood loss and a shorter length of hospital stay. However, further studies are needed to confirm the results.

In patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), there has been some evidence favoring pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) over pancreatojejunostomy (PJ) in the occurrence of postoperative pancreatic fistulas (POPF) and considering PG as a safer anastomotic technique. However, other publications revealed comparable incidences of POPF attributed to both techniques. The current work attempts to reach a more consolidated conclusion about such an issue.
This is a systematic review and meta-analysis that analyzed the studies comparing PG and PJ during PD in terms of the rate of POPF occurrence. Studies were obtained by searching the Scopus, PubMed Central, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases.
35 articles published between 1995 and 2022 presented data from 14,666 patients; 4547 underwent PG and 10,119 underwent PJ. Statistically significant lower rates of POPF (p = 0.044) and clinically relevant CR-POPF (p = 0.043) were shown in the PG group. The post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH) was significantly higher in the PG group, while no significant difference was found between the two groups in the clinically significant PPH. No statistically significant differences were found regarding the amount of intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, DGE, overall morbidity rates, reoperation rates, or mortality rates. The percentage of male sex in the PG group and the percentage of soft pancreas in the PJ group seem to influence the odds ratio of CR-POPF (p = 0.076 and 0.074, respectively).
The present study emphasizes the superiority of PG over PJ regarding CR-POPF rates. Higher rates of postoperative hemorrhage were associated with PG. Yet, the clinically significant hemorrhage rate was comparable between the two groups.

OBJECTIVE: There remains a lack of consensus regarding the benefits of stent placement following pancreaticojejunostomy in terms of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistulas (CR-POPFs). This study was aimed at analyzing the effects of stent placement, stent technique (internal and external), stent size, and dilation of the main pancreatic duct on CR-POPFs.
METHODS: Our study comprised a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials involving patients undergoing pancreaticojejunostomy. The primary outcome was defined as the incidence of CR-POPFs. Additionally, subgroup analyses were conducted, and pooled analyses were performed to provide comparative references.
RESULTS: Twelve randomized controlled trials, including a total of 1117 patients, were included. Compared with no stent placement, stenting did not exhibit a significant association with reduced CR-POPF incidence (odds ratio [OR] ​= ​0.60, 95% CI: 0.34-1.04, P ​= ​0.07). Subgroup analysis revealed that only external stents, and not internal stents, were significantly associated with a reduced CR-POPF incidence compared with no stent placement (OR ​= ​0.53, 95% CI: 0.28-0.99, P ​= ​0.05 vs. OR ​= ​0.92, 95% CI: 0.28-3.05, P ​= ​0.89). Furthermore, stent placement in patients with a main pancreatic duct diameter of ≤3 ​mm, and not in those with a main pancreatic duct diameter of >3 ​mm, was associated with a significantly reduced CR-POPF incidence compared with no stent placement (OR ​= ​0.24, 95% CI: 0.07-0.78, P ​= ​0.02 vs. OR ​= ​1.58, 95% CI: 0.41-6.06, P ​= ​0.50).
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest a potential role for external stent placement in the prevention of CR-POPFs after pancreaticojejunostomy, particularly in patients with undilated pancreatic ducts. The reliability of our findings is constrained by the limited number of studies included.
UNASSIGNED: CRD42022380103.

BACKGROUND: Pancreaticopleural fistula is a rare complication of pancreatitis and poses diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. This case report sheds light on the unique challenges posed by pancreaticopleural fistula as a rare complication of pancreatitis. The aim is to contribute valuable insights to the scientific literature by presenting a case involving a middle-aged man with acute necrotizing pancreatitis and associated pleural effusion.
METHODS: A 41-year-old Asian male with a history of pancreatitis and chronic alcohol use presented with severe dyspnea, chest pain, and left-sided pleural effusion. Elevated serum amylase lipase levels and imaging confirmed acute necrotizing pancreatitis with a computed tomography severity index of 8/10. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography revealed pancreatic necrosis and pseudocyst formation and findings suggestive of pancreaticopleural fistula. The patient was then treated with octreotide therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: The management of pancreaticopleural fistula demands a comprehensive and individualized approach. Recognition guided by high clinical suspicion coupled with appropriate investigations and a careful balance between medical, endoscopic, and surgical interventions is crucial for achieving favorable outcomes. This case report adds to the scientific literature by providing insights into the complexities of pancreaticopleural fistula and emphasizing the importance of personalized strategies in its management.

BACKGROUND: The superiority of early drain removal (EDR) versus late (LDR) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has been demonstrated only in RCTs.
METHODS: A meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model and trial sequential analysis. The critical endpoints were morbidity, redrainage, relaparotomy, and postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). Hemorrhage (PPH), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), length of stay (LOS), and readmission rates were also evaluated. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Type I and type II errors were excluded, comparing the accrued sample size (ASS) with the required sample size (RIS). When RIS is superior to ASS, type I or II errors can be hypothesized.
RESULTS: ASS was 632 for all endpoints except DGE and PPH (557 patients). The major morbidity (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.32-0.97) was lower in the EDR group. The CR-POPF rate was lower in the EDR than in the LDR group (RR 0.50), but this difference is not statistically significant (95% CI 0.24-1.03). The RIS to confirm or exclude these results can be reached by randomizing 5959 patients. The need for percutaneous drainage, relaparotomy, PPH, DGE, and readmission rates was similar. The related RISs were higher than ASS, and type II errors cannot be excluded. LOS was shorter in the EDR than the LDR group (MD - 2.25; 95% CI - 3.23 to - 1.28). The RIS was 567, and type I errors can be excluded.
CONCLUSIONS: EDR, compared with LDR, is associated with lower major morbidity and shorter LOS.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a severe complication following a pancreatoduodenectomy. An accurate prediction of POPF could assist the surgeon in offering tailor-made treatment decisions. The use of radiomic features has been introduced to predict POPF. A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the performance of models predicting POPF using radiomic features and to systematically evaluate the methodological quality.
METHODS: Studies with patients undergoing a pancreatoduodenectomy and radiomics analysis on computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the Radiomics Quality Score (RQS) and Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) statement.
RESULTS: Seven studies were included in this systematic review, comprising 1300 patients, of whom 364 patients (28 %) developed POPF. The area under the curve (AUC) of the included studies ranged from 0.76 to 0.95. Only one study externally validated the model, showing an AUC of 0.89 on this dataset. Overall adherence to the RQS (31 %) and TRIPOD guidelines (54 %) was poor.
CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review showed that high predictive power was reported of studies using radiomic features to predict POPF. However, the quality of most studies was poor. Future studies need to standardize the methodology.
BACKGROUND: not registered.