ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Selected studies have reported improved outcomes in laparoscopic compared with open distal pancreatic resection. Concerns regarding failure to achieve proper oncological resection and compromised long-term outcomes remain. This study investigated whether postoperative outcomes and long-term survival after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy are comparable to those after an open procedure. METHODS: This retrospective case-control study included patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy for resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2013, identified from the National Cancer Database. Propensity score nearest-neighbour 1 : 1 matching was performed between patients undergoing laparoscopic or open distal pancreatectomy based on all relevant co-variables. The primary outcome was overall survival. RESULTS: Of 1947 eligible patients, 605 (31·1 per cent) underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. After propensity score matching, two well balanced groups of 563 patients each were analysed. There was no difference in overall survival at 3 years after laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy (41·6 versus 36·0 per cent; hazard ratio 0·93, 95 per cent c.i. 0·77 to 1·12; P = 0·457). The overall conversion rate was 27·3 per cent (165 of 605). Patients who underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy had outcomes comparable to those of patients who had an open procedure with regard to median time to chemotherapy (50 versus 50 days; P = 0·342), median number of nodes examined (12 versus 12; P = 0·759); 30-day mortality (1·2 versus 0·9 per cent; P = 0·562); 90-day mortality (2·8 versus 3·7 per cent; P = 0·403), 30-day readmission rate (9·6 versus 9·2 per cent; P = 0·838) and positive margin rate (14·9 versus 18·5 per cent; P = 0·110). However, median duration of hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic group (6 versus 7 days; P < 0·001). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is an acceptable alternative to open distal pancreatectomy with no detriment to survival.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Laparoscopy/methods , Laparotomy/methods , Pancreatectomy/methods , Pancreatic Neoplasms/surgery , Propensity Score , Adenocarcinoma/diagnosis , Adenocarcinoma/mortality , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Case-Control Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Operative Time , Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Pancreatic Neoplasms/mortality , Postoperative Period , Retrospective Studies , Survival Rate/trends , Treatment Outcome , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) is useful for selecting patients with thyroid nodules for thyroidectomy. Its value in patients who have been exposed to low-dose therapeutic radiation is questionable because these patients have an increased risk of multifocal benign and malignant tumours, and thyroid cancer is common in such patients. METHODS: Between 1960 and 1999, 171 patients with one or more thyroid nodules who had a history of exposure to radiation underwent operation; 49 of these patients had preoperative FNAC. The cytology results in these 49 patients were compared with those of an age- and sex-matched control group of patients with thyroid nodules who did not have a history of radiation exposure. RESULTS: Of those who had been exposed to radiation, six of 20 patients with 'benign' cytology by FNAC and six of 16 patients with 'suspicious' cytology had thyroid cancer. All 13 specimens considered to be malignant on FNAC were indeed malignant. There was a higher rate of false-negative cytological examinations among patients with a history of irradiation that in those without. CONCLUSION: FNAC of thyroid nodules in patients with a history of irradiation is not as accurate as that in non-irradiated patients, primarily because of coexisting occult thyroid cancers.
