PURPOSE: The consumers' preferences are not considered in developing or implementing new medical technologies. Furthermore, little efforts are made to investigate their demands. Therefore, their preferred surgical method and the factors affecting that preference were investigated in pancreatic surgery. METHODS: Six-hundred subjects including 100 medical personnel (MP) and 500 lay persons (LP) were surveyed. Questionnaire included basic information on different methods of distal pancreatectomy; open surgery (OS), laparoscopic surgery (LS), and robotic surgery (RS). Assuming they required the operation, participants were told to indicate their preferred method along with a reason and an acceptable cost for both benign and malignant conditions. RESULTS: For benign disease, the most preferred method was LS. Limiting the choice to LS and RS, LS was preferred for cost and well-established safety and efficacy. OS was favored in malignant disease for the concern for radicality. Limiting the choice to LS and RS, LS was favored for its better-established safety and efficacy. The majority thought that LS and RS were both overpriced. Comparing MP and LP responses, both groups preferred LS in benign and OS in malignant conditions. However, LP more than MP tended to prefer RS under both benign and malignant conditions. LP thought that LS was expensive whereas MP thought the cost reasonable. Both groups felt that RS was too expensive. CONCLUSION: Though efforts for development of novel techniques and broadening indication should be encouraged, still more investments and research should focus on LS and OS to provide optimal management and satisfaction to the patients.
Consumer Satisfaction ; Humans ; Investments ; Laparoscopy ; Methods ; Pancreas ; Pancreatectomy ; Surveys and Questionnaires

Humans ; Pancreatectomy ; adverse effects ; methods ; Postoperative Complications ; Spleen ; blood supply

Pancreatic cancer still represents a serious medical concern for which no adequate solution has thus far been found. Surgical resection, when possible, remains the primary treatment modality and can result in long-term cure. The value of more radical resection remains open to debate, despite the negative results of some recent randomized trials with standard vs. extended lymphadenectomy. More effective patient selection, more rational resection, and more compositive treatment should be emphasized in management strategies. In the future, appropriately designed randomized trials of standard vs. extended resections may confirm the benefit of extended surgical resections. In addition, well powered trials of adjuvant therapies strategies together with surgical resections may identify more effective combinations, which may improve the survival of patients with pancreatic cancer.
Humans ; Lymph Node Excision ; methods ; Pancreatectomy ; methods ; trends ; Pancreatic Neoplasms ; pathology ; surgery ; Pancreaticoduodenectomy ; adverse effects ; methods

BACKGROUNDSurgery is regarded as the most effective treatment to relieve pain and reduce complications in chronic pancreatitis (CP). Two major strategies exist: duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (DPPHR) and pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Many studies suggest that DPPHR offers advantages during surgery and in the short-term; however, the long-term effects have not been thoroughly investigated. We analyzed the long-term outcomes of DPPHR and PD, over follow-up times of at least 1 year, to determine the optimal surgical treatment for CP.

METHODSWe systemically reviewed all CP surgical treatment reports, and only included randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing DPPHR and PD, excluding unqualified studies using several pre-specified criteria. When multiple publications of a single trial were found, the most comprehensive current data were selected. Characteristics of the study populations and long-term postoperative outcome parameters were collected. The quality of the studies and data was analyzed using RevMan 4.2 software.

RESULTSFive trials were qualified for meta-analysis, with 261 participants in total (114 in the DPPHR group and 147 in the PD group). There were no significant differences in the age, gender, or indications for surgery of each group. At the mean of 5.7-year (1 - 14 years) follow-up examination, DPPHR and PD resulted in equally effective pain relief, exocrine and endocrine function, and similar mortality rates (P > 0.05); however, DPPHR patients had improved global quality of life and weight gain, and reduced diarrhea and fatigue (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONDPPHR and PD result in equal pain relief, mortality, and pancreatic function; however, DPPHR provides superior long-term outcomes.

Duodenum ; surgery ; Humans ; Pancreatectomy ; methods ; Pancreaticoduodenectomy ; methods ; Pancreatitis, Chronic ; psychology ; surgery ; Quality of Life ; Time Factors

OBJECTIVETo compare the safety and effectiveness of DPPHR with PPPD/PD for treating chronic pancreatitis with an inflammatory mass in the head of pancreas.

METHODSThe relative data bases such as Medline, EMBase, Biosis, COCHRANE Library, Science Citation Index, SinoMed, Chinese Journal Full-text Database, Wangfang, CNKI were searched systematically, researchers selected randomized controlled trials (RCT) and prospective clinical controlled trials (CCT) . The assessment of the bias risk of the included trials was according to the assessing tools suggested by Cochrane Handbook 5.1. The Review Manage 5.2 was used to perform the statistical analysis.

RESULTSIn total, 5 RCTs and 2 CCTs were included, 381 patients involved. Comparing with PPPD/PD procedure, DPPHR has no significant difference in terms of the mortality of perioperative period (RD = 0.01, P = 0.51), the incidence of bleeding (RD = -0.01, P = 0.72), pancreatic fistula(RD = -0.01, P = 0.59) and delayed gastric emptying (RD = -0.15, P = 0.10), the ration of complete pain relief after operation (RR = 1.06, P = 0.32) and the score of global quality of life (WMD = 10.31, P = 0.19).While DPPHR had significant superiorities in terms of the total morbidity of perioperative period (RR = 0.60, P = 0.008), the duration of the operations(WMD = -71.60, P = 0.03), the postoperative hospitalization duration(WMD = -3.95, P < 0.01), weight gain(WMD = 3.68, P < 0.01), occupational rehabilitation after the operations (RR = 1.38, P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONSIn terms of reducing the morbidity of perioperative period, shortening the duration of the operations and the postoperative hospitalization duration, weight gain, occupational rehabilitation after the operations, the DPPHR is more favorable for improving patients' life qualities comparing with PPPD/PD.

Duodenum ; surgery ; Humans ; Pancreas ; surgery ; Pancreatectomy ; methods ; Pancreaticoduodenectomy ; methods ; Pancreatitis, Chronic ; surgery ; Prospective Studies ; Quality of Life

OBJECTIVETo evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.

METHODSTotally 68 patients (male 23, female 45) aged 17 to 77 years, with distal pancreatic lesions, underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy from November 2003 to December 2010. The clinical data were collected. Safety, feasibility and crucial technique manipulation were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTSAll 68 operations were successful with two cases conversion to open, including 48 cases combined with splenectomy, and 18 cases with preservation of spleen. Fourteen cases received with combination resection of multi-organs, including 4 cases with cholecystectomy, 1 case resection of right adrenal adenoma and cholecystectomy, 1 case with myomectomy and left ovarian teratomectomy; 1 case with right ovarian teratomectomy, 1 case with resection of left adrenal adenoma, 1 case with resection of both adrenal adenoma, 1 case with resection of liver metastasis, 1 case with cholecystectomy and resection of liver metastasis, 1 case with resection of left adrenal adenoma and liver metastasis, 1 case with resection of left adrenal adenoma and colon and spleen, 1 case with biopsy of liver nodule. The mean operative time was (209 ± 58) minutes, the mean intraoperative blood loss was (191 ± 123) ml, and the mean postoperative hospital stay was (8 ± 4) days. The rate of overall postoperative complications was 18.1%, including an 12.1% rate of clinical pancreatic fistula. Only one case needed a reoperation, and there was no postoperative mortality.

CONCLUSIONLaparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with or without splenectomy is safe and feasible in the treatment of most distal pancreatic tumors.

Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Female ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; methods ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Pancreatectomy ; methods ; Retrospective Studies ; Young Adult

PURPOSE: Central pancreatectomy (CP) may be indicated for the treatment of benign or low-grade malignant tumor in the neck and proximal body of the pancreas. Pancreatic fistula is one of the most common complications after CP. In this study, we suggested an inverted mattress pancreaticojejunostomy (IM-PJ) technique to decrease the risk of pancreatic fistula. METHODS: Between 2010 and 2015, CP was performed with IM-PJ for 10 consecutive patients with a benign or low-grade malignant tumor in the neck and proximal body of the pancreas. All clinical and pathological data were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: Median age was 56.4 years (range, 17–75 years). Median surgery duration was 286 minutes (range, 205–410 minutes). In all cases, the distal stump was reconstructed using the IM-PJ method. Median duration of hospital stay was 23.8 days (range, 9–53 days). No patient mortality occurred. Pancreatic fistula developed in 9 cases (90%); however, all fistulas were grade A and resolved without surgical or radiological intervention. Nine patients remain well with no recurrence or new endocrine or exocrine dysfunction. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that the outcomes of CP with IM-PJ are reasonable for prevention of pancreatic fistula following CP.
Fistula ; Humans ; Length of Stay ; Methods ; Mortality ; Neck ; Pancreas ; Pancreatectomy* ; Pancreatic Fistula* ; Pancreaticojejunostomy* ; Recurrence ; Retrospective Studies

OBJECTIVETo investigate the value and safety of the surgery with vascular resection and reconstruction during pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer.

METHODSThe clinical data of 206 patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent radical resection were retrospectively analyzed from January 2009 to March 2014 in Lihuili Hospital, Medical center of Ningbo.All cases were divided into non-vascular resection group(132 cases), the combined vein resection group(66 cases) and the combined arterial resection group(8 cases). The peri-operation data, the incidence of postoperative complications and the survival were compared in pairs among three groups.All patients were followed up till September 2014.

RESULTSThere were no statistical differences for the preoperative data among three groups.The operation time and the blood loss (M(QR)) were (347±96)minutes and (500(400)) ml in non-vascular resection group, (425±91)minutes and (800(500))ml in combined vein resection group, (508±120)minutes and (1 750(2 075))ml in combined arterial resection group, with significant differences among three groups(all P<0.01). The incidence of postoperative complication was 16.7%(22/132) in non-vascular resection group, 28.8%(19/66) in combined vein resection group, and 6 cases in combined arterial resection group, respectively.There were significant differences between non-vascular resection group and combined vein resection group(P<0.05), non-vascular resection group and combined arterial resection group(P<0.05), as well as between combined vein resection group and combined arterial resection group(P<0.05). The median survival time was 15 months for non-vascular resection group, 15 months for combined vein resection group, and 12 months for combined arterial resection group.No significant difference was found among three groups(all P>0.05). The postoperative mortality was nil for all of groups.

CONCLUSIONSCompared with non-vascular resection, combined vein resection can be performed safely with a similar prognosis. The surgery of combined arterial resection could only be justified when R0 resection for pancreatic cancer could be achieved for highly selected patients.

Arteries ; surgery ; Humans ; Pancreatectomy ; methods ; Pancreatic Neoplasms ; surgery ; Postoperative Complications ; Prognosis ; Retrospective Studies ; Veins ; surgery

OBJECTIVETo compare the clinical results of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP), confirm the potential advantages of LDP.

METHODSThe medical records of 30 consecutive patients who underwent LDP were reviewed and compared with those of 42 patients who underwent ODP.

RESULTSOperation time was longer for LDP than for ODP [(186.33±58.98 min) vs (149.29±29.00 min), P=0.001], but blood loss [(223.33±143.68 ml) vs(251.19±103.29 ml), P=0.341] and spleen-saving rate(42.3% vs 61.8%, P=0.192) were no significant difference between the 2 groups. Decreased postoperative bowel recovery time [(2.37±0.85 d) vs (2.81±0.67 d), P=0.016], oral intake time [(2.37±0.85 d) vs (2.81±0.67 d), P=0.016] and length of stay [(7.43±1.57 d) vs (9.67±1.41 d), P=0.000] were seen in LDP group. However, the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (16.67% vs 21.43%, P=0.619) was no significant difference between the 2 groups. 3 cases of wound infection and 2 cases of lung related complication were occurred in ODP group, but none in LDP group.

CONCLUSIONLDP is a safe and effective surgical approach, providing the same surgical results comparable to that of ODP, and substantially faster recovery. However, high requirement of laparoscopic technique and equipments limited its further clinical application.

Adult ; Female ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Pancreas ; surgery ; Pancreatectomy ; methods ; Pancreatic Neoplasms ; surgery ; Treatment Outcome

OBJECTIVETo explore the learning curve for middle pancreatectomy by comparing the outcomes of middle pancreatectomy operated by a single treatment group at different stages.

METHODSA total of 48 patients received middle pancreatectomy by single treatment group between January 2006 and April 2014 at our hospital. These 48 cases were divided into 10 stages (5 cases in each) according to the operation sequence. The operation time, blood loss, surgical complications, rate of negative margin and postoperative hospital stay were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTSThere was no significant difference among the 10 stages in respect to surgical complications, rate of negative margin and postoperative hospital stay (P>0.05). The median operation time and blood loss in the first stage was 375 min and 530 ml, respectively. The median operation time and blood loss in the second stage was 280 min and 330 ml, respectively. There were significant differences between these two stages and the other later stages in median operation time and blood loss (P<0.01). However, there was no significant difference among the stages 3 to 10 in the median operation time and blood loss (P>0.05 for all).

CONCLUSIONAfter 10-15 cases of middle pancreatectomy, a surgeon can be skilled and experienced in this surgical procedure with few surgical complications.

Humans ; Learning Curve ; Length of Stay ; Operative Time ; Pancreatectomy ; methods ; Retrospective Studies