Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Versus Open Total Pancreatectomy A Pan-European Propensity Score Matched Study

Objective:To assess postoperative 90-day outcomes after minimally invasive (laparoscopic/robot-assisted) total pancreatectomy (MITP) in selected patients versus open total pancreatectomy (OTP) among European centers. Background:Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery is becoming increasingly popular but data on MITP are scarce and multicenter studies comparing outcomes versus OTP are lacking. It therefore remains unclear if MITP is a valid alternative. Methods:Multicenter retrospective propensity-score matched study including consecutive adult patients undergoing MITP or OTP for all indications at 16 European centers in 7 countries (2008-2017). Patients after MITP were matched (1:1, caliper 0.02) to OTP controls. Missing data were imputed. The primary outcome was 90-day major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo >= 3a). Secondary outcomes included 90-day mortality, length of hospital stay, and survival. Results:Of 361 patients (99MITP/262 OTP), 70 MITP procedures (50 laparoscopic, 15 robotic, 5 hybrid) could be matched to 70 OTP controls. After matching, MITP was associated with a lower rate of major morbidity (17% MITP vs. 31% OTP, P = 0.022). The 90-day mortality (1.4% MITP vs. 7.1% OTP, P = 0.209) and median hospital stay (17 [IQR 11-24] MITP vs. 12 [10-23] days OTP, P = 0.876) did not differ significantly. Among 81 patients with PDAC, overall survival was 3.7 (IQR 1.7-N/A) versus 0.9 (IQR 0.5-N/ A) years, for MITP versus OTP, which was nonsignificant after stratification by T-stage. Conclusion:This international propensity score matched study showed that MITP may be a valuable alternative to OTP in selected patients, given the associated lower rate of major morbidity.

Automated summary

This multicenter retrospective study suggests that minimally invasive total pancreatectomy may be a valuable alternative to open total pancreatectomy, given the associated lower rate of major morbidity.