• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • COVID-19 Annoucements
    • Search
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Who is SAGES?
    • SAGES Mission Statement
    • Advocacy
    • Strategic Plan, 2020-2023
    • Committees
      • Request to Join a SAGES Committee
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Full Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
    • Donate to the SAGES Foundation
    • Awards
      • George Berci Award
      • Pioneer in Surgical Endoscopy
      • Excellence In Clinical Care
      • International Ambassador
      • IRCAD Visiting Fellowship
      • Social Justice and Health Equity
      • Excellence in Community Surgery
      • Distinguished Service
      • Early Career Researcher
      • Researcher in Training
      • Jeff Ponsky Master Educator
      • Excellence in Medical Leadership
      • Barbara Berci Memorial Award
      • Brandeis Scholarship
      • Advocacy Summit
      • RAFT Annual Meeting Abstract Contest and Awards
  • Meetings
    • NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2023 Scientific Session Call For Abstracts
      • 2023 Emerging Technology Call For Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • Industry
      • Advertising Opportunities
      • Exhibit Opportunities
      • Sponsorship Opportunities
    • Future Meetings
    • Past Meetings
      • SAGES 2022
      • SAGES 2021
    • Related Meetings Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Applications
      • Active Membership
      • Affiliate Membership
      • Associate Active Membership
      • Candidate Membership
      • International Membership
      • Medical Student Membership
    • Member News
      • Member Spotlight
      • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find a SAGES Member
  • Publications
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • SAGES Manuals
    • SCOPE – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Annoucements
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • OpiVoid.org
    • SAGES.TV Video Library
    • Safe Cholecystectomy Program
      • Safe Cholecystectomy Didactic Modules
    • Masters Program
      • SAGES Facebook Program Collaboratives
      • Acute Care Surgery
      • Bariatric
      • Biliary
      • Colorectal
      • Flexible Endoscopy (upper or lower)
      • Foregut
      • Hernia
      • Robotics
    • Educational Opportunities
    • HPB/Solid Organ Program
    • Courses for Residents
      • Advanced Courses
      • Basic Courses
    • Video Based Assessments (VBA)
    • Robotics Fellows Course
    • MIS Fellows Course
    • Facebook Livestreams
    • Free Webinars For Residents
    • SMART Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video
    • SAGES at Cine-Med
      • SAGES Top 21 MIS Procedures
      • SAGES Pearls
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
      • SAGES Tips & Tricks of the Top 21
  • Opportunities
    • NEW-Area of Concentrated Training Seal (ACT)-Advanced Flexible Endoscopy-Coming Soon!
    • SAGES Fellowship Certification for Advanced GI MIS and Comprehensive Flexible Endoscopy
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • SAGES Research Opportunities
    • Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery
    • Fundamentals of Endoscopic Surgery
    • Fundamental Use of Surgical Energy
    • Job Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs and Humanitarian Efforts
  • Search
    • Search All SAGES Content
    • Search SAGES Guidelines
    • Search the Video Library
    • Search the Image Library
    • Search the Abstracts Archive
  • Store
    • “Unofficial” Logo Products
  • Log In

Laparoscopic pancraticoduodenectomy: An experience and review of outcomes

Bing Peng, PhD, Zhong Wu, PhD, Jin Zhou, PhD

West Chinal Hospital, Sichuan University

Background: Innovations in surgical strategies and technologies have facilitated LPD. Even so, it’s not globally acknowledged alternatively approach simply done at several centres on the globe. Our research planned to evaluate the practicality and basic safety of LPD compared with open pancraticoduodenectomy OPD.

Methods: Our retrospective study enrolled 12 patients (6 female and 6 male) who underwent LPD at a single center Between November 2010 and August 2012. The mean age was 60.5 years. All the operations were attempted laparoscopically. In the mean time, we choose another 24 patients (12 female and 12 male) who received OPD. Patient characteristics, histologic variety of the tumor, morbidity, mortality and actuarial survival rates were studied.

Results: The etiology of the patients with LPD included ampullary carcinoma (n=9), low common bile duct cancer (n=3). For 4 patients, the anastomosis was performed total laparoscopy. To the remaining 8 patients, the resection was performed laparoscopically, using the renovation done via a small midline incision. No patient had conversion. Significant shorter operation time was found in OPD group of 383 minutes compared with 530 minutes in LPD group with a p value of less than 0.001. The estimated blood loss was 280 ml in LPD group and 337 ml in OPD group without statistically difference. Four of twelve patients (33.3%) in LPD group and eleven of twenty-four patients (45.8%) in OPD group received a transfusion. One patient in LPD group received additional operation of intraoperative choledochoscopy, while two patients in OPD group taken additional procedure of right colectomy and partial hepatectomy, respectively. No difference was found in the postoperative hospital stay. Eight patients (66.7%) in LPD group and 14 patients (58.3%) in OPD group experienced postoperative complications after surgery. This comparison showed no statistical differences in incidence of complications between the two groups. Two patients in OPD group examined as low extremity deep venous thrombosis by ultrasound. They were treated by antithrombotic prophylaxis of low-weight herapin, and elastic stocking. There have been 7 cases of pancreatic fistula (four from LPD group and three from OPD group), of which had been effectively monitored and heal conservatively by leaving the drainage in place on patient’s discharge, somatostatine, antibiotherapy, and longer hospital stay. One patient experienced re-laparoscopic surgery after LPD because of postoperative bleeding 2 hours after surgery. He was managed by relaparoscopy and hemostasis and recovered soon. Three patients in OPD group had postoperative bleeding. Amongst our LPD group and at 9 (range: 3~19) months follow-up, one patient had metastatic disease and local recurrence. The other patients entered an oncologic protocol of follow-up evaluation involving periodic physical, biochemical, and radiologic investigations. They were disease free at the latest evaluation.

Conclusion: LPD could be securely accomplished by experienced laparoscopic surgeons. More substantial sequence and extended follow-up intervals are required to set up the existing outcomes.


Session: Poster Presentation

Program Number: P329

59

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Pinterest
  • WhatsApp
  • Reddit

Related

« Return to SAGES 2013 abstract archive

Our Mission

Innovate, educate and collaborate to improve patient care.

Recently, on SAGES…

Critical View of Safety (CVS) Challenge QR Code

The SAGES Critical View of Safety Challenge – Donate Your Lap Chole Videos!

The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons is hosting the first Artificial Intelligence Data Challenge conducted by surgeons. The aim of this challenge is to generate a large and diverse dataset of laparoscopic cholecystectomy videos, annotated with respect to the subcomponents of the Critical View of Safety (CVS). Computer scientists from all over the […]

Respuesta de SAGES al Estudio NordICC sobre el beneficio de las colonoscopias de detección

SAGES desea aclarar los resultados del estudio NordICC y colocarlos en contexto de los esfuerzos de varias agencias nacionales para reducir el riesgo de cáncer colorrectal – la segunda causa de muerte por cáncer más frecuente en los Estados Unidos-, mediante la promoción de la detección y tratamiento oportuno de las lesiones.

SAGES Response to NordICC Study Regarding Benefit of Screening Colonoscopies

The NordICC Study recently published in The New England Journal of Medicine and widely reported on by media outlets has raised questions regarding the benefit of screening colonoscopy in lowering the risk of colorectal cancer and cancer-related deaths among otherwise healthy and symptom-free men and women aged 55 to 64. Provocative headlines and commentaries have […]

Contact SAGES

Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons
11300 W. Olympic Blvd Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90064 USA
webmaster@sages.org
Tel: (310) 437-0544

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Important Links

SAGES 2023 Meeting Information

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals

 

  • taTME Study Info
  • Foundation
  • SAGES.TV
  • MyCME
  • Educational Activities

Copyright © 2023 Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons