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. 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

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a severe complication after distal pancreatectomy (DP); however, it is unclear how to effectively reduce the incidence. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to determine whether reinforced stapling reduces POPF after DP. From February 2007 to April 2023, a comprehensive search of electronic data and references was conducted in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. In this study, the perioperative outcomes were evaluated for the reinforced stapler (RS) group and the standard stapler (SS) group in DP using Review Manager Software. Using fixed- or random-effects models, pooled odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. In total, three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with 425 patients and five observational clinical studies (OCS) with 318 patients were included. In pooled meta-analyses from RCTs, there was no difference between the two groups in the incidence of POPF (OR = 0.79; 95% CI [0.47,1.35]; P = 0.39), intraoperative blood loss (MD = 10.66; 95% CI [− 28.83,50.16]; P = 0.6), operative time (MD = 9.88; 95% CI [− 8.92,28.67]; P = 0.3), major morbidity (OR = 1.12; 95% CI [0.67,1.90]; P = 0.66), reoperation (OR = 0.97; 95% CI [0.41,2.32]; P = 0.95), readmission (OR = 0.99; 95% CI [0.57,1.72]; P = 0.97) or hospital stay (MD = − 0.95; 95% CI [− 5.22,3.31]; P = 0.66). However, the results of POPF and readmission were favorable for RS in the OCS group.

Objective:The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on the safety and effectiveness regarding outcomes of minimally invasive total pancreatectomy (MITP) versus open total pancreatectomy (OTP). Background:Total pancreatectomy is a complicated operation in abdominal surgery. The flexibility of minimally invasive surgery offers a new surgical approach to this technology. At present, there is little research on MITP, and its advantages over OTP remain uncertain. Methods:A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was conducted basing on comparative studies between MITP and OTP from January 1943 to November 2022. Intraoperative outcomes and postoperative outcomes were assessed. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences with a 95% CI were calculated using fixed-effect or random-effect models under heterogeneity. Results:Seven studies with a total of 4275 patients were included. The major morbidity in the MITP group was significant lower (OR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.30-0.84, P=0.008, I-2= 0%) than OTP group. At the same time, comparing with OTP, the MITP group had lower estimated blood loss (MD -362.50, 95% CI -641.34 to -83.66, P=0.01, I-2=96%) and lower intraoperative transfusion rate (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.16-0.84, P=0.02, I-2=0%). There were no significant differences between the MITP and OTP groups for other outcomes. Conclusions:The results suggested that MITP was associated with lower major morbidity, estimated blood loss, and intraoperative transfusion rate comparing with OTP. However, the further evidence with a better design is required.

Review question / Objective: 1.P (patients): Male or female patients over the age of 18 with a benign or malignant disease that requires elective total Pancreatectomy; 2.I (intervention): minimally invasive total pancreatectomy (MITP), includ Robot-assisted or laparoscopic total pancreatectomy；3.C (control): Open total pancreatectomy (OTP); 4.O(outcome): At least 1 of the main outcomes. Condition being studied: Total pancreatectomy (TP) is so complicated, the flexibility of robotic or laparoscopic provides a new minimally invasive method. At present, only scarcely evidence were report on robotic or laparoscopic total pancreatectomy. It’s advantages over OTP are still uncertain.

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is the most serious complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Recently, Blumgart anastomosis (BA) has been found to have some advantages in terms of decreasing POPF compared with other pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) using either the duct-to-mucosa or invagination approach. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the safety and effectiveness of BA versus non-Blumgart anastomosis after PD. The PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Library were systematically searched for studies published from January 2000 to March 2020. One RCT and ten retrospective comparative studies were included with 2412 patients, of whom 1155 (47.9%) underwent BA and 1257 (52.1%) underwent non-Blumgart anastomosis. BA was associated with significantly lower rates of grade B/C POPF (OR 0.38, 0.22 to 0.65; P = 0.004) than non-Blumgart anastomosis. Additionally, in the subgroup analysis, the grade B/C POPF was also reduced in BA group than the Kakita anastomosis group. There was no significant difference regarding grade B/C POPF in terms of soft pancreatic texture between the BA and non-Blumgart anastomosis groups. In conclusion, BA after PD was associated with a decreased risk of grade B/C POPF. Therefore, BA seems to be a valuable PJ to reduce POPF comparing with non-Blumgart anastomosis.