liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Oncological resection and perioperative outcomes of robotic, laparoscopic and open pancreatoduodenectomy for ampullary adenocarcinoma: a propensity score matched international multicenter cohort study
Amsterdam UMC, Netherlands; Canc Ctr Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Amsterdam UMC, Netherlands; Canc Ctr Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Pisa Univ Hosp, Italy.
ASST Grande Osped Metropolitano Niguarda, Italy.
Show others and affiliations
2025 (English)In: HPB, ISSN 1365-182X, E-ISSN 1477-2574, Vol. 27, no 3, p. 318-329Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Ampullary adenocarcinoma (AAC) typically presents at an early stage due to biliary obstruction and therefore might be specifically suitable for minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD). However, studies assessing MIPD specifically for AAC, including the robotic and laparoscopic approach, are limited. The aim of this study is to compare short- and long-term oncological resection and perioperative outcomes of robotic (RPD), laparoscopic (LPD) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) performed specifically for AAC. Methods: In this multicenter international cohort study, encompassing 35 centers from 11 countries, MIPD versus OPD and subgroup analyses of LPD versus RPD were undertaken. The primary outcomes regarded the oncological resection (R1 resection rate, lymph node yield) and 5-years overall survival. Secondary outcomes were perioperative outcomes (including intra-operative variables, surgical complications and hospital stay). Results: In total, patients with AAC who underwent OPD (1721) or MIPD (141) were included. After propensity-score matching, 134 patients per cohort were included. The MIPD group consisted of 53 RPDs and 71 LPDs (50 per group after PSM). There was no difference in overall survival between MIPD and OPD (61.6 % vs 56.2 %, P = 0.215). In the MIPD group, operative time was longer (439 vs 360 min, P < 0.001). Between RPD and LPD, overall survival was not significantly different (75.8 % vs 47.4 %, P = 0.098) and lymph node yield was higher in RPD (21 vs 18, P = 0.014). Conclusion: In conclusion, patients with AAC seem to have comparable oncological resection and perioperative outcomes from MIPD compared to the traditional OPD. Both RPD as LPD appear to be safe alternatives for patients with AAC, which warrants confirmation by future randomized studies.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
ELSEVIER SCI LTD , 2025. Vol. 27, no 3, p. 318-329
National Category
Surgery
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-212579DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2024.11.013ISI: 001439536900001PubMedID: 39765373Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85214315526OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-212579DiVA, id: diva2:1947631
Available from: 2025-03-26 Created: 2025-03-26 Last updated: 2025-03-26

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Björnsson, Bergthor
By organisation
Division of Surgery, Orthopedics and OncologyFaculty of Medicine and Health SciencesDepartment of Surgery in Linköping
In the same journal
HPB
Surgery

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 34 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf