The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Total Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Feasibility and Outcome in an Early Experience
Abstract
HYPOTHESIS: Total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy is a safe and effective therapeutic approach. DESIGN: Single-institutional retrospective review. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: All consecutive patients undergoing total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy from July 2007 through July 2009 at a single center (n = 62). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Blood loss, operative time, postoperative morbidity, length of hospital stay, and 30-day or in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Of 65 patients undergoing laparoscopic resection, 62 patients with a mean age of 66 years (SD, 12 years) underwent total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. The pancreaticojejunostomy consisted of a duct-to-mucosa anastomosis with interrupted suture. Median operative time was 368 minutes (range, 258-608 minutes) and median blood loss was 240 mL (range, 30-1200 mL). Diagnosis was pancreatic adenocarcinoma (n = 31), intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (n = 12), periampullary adenocarcinoma (n = 8), neuroendocrine tumor (n = 4), chronic pancreatitis (n = 3), cholangiocarcinoma (n = 1), metastatic renal cell carcinoma (n = 1), cystadenoma (n = 1), and duodenal adenoma (n = 1). Median tumor size was 3 cm (range, 0.9-10.0 cm) and the median number of lymph nodes harvested was 15 (range, 6-31). Perioperative morbidity occurred in 26 patients and included pancreatic fistula (n = 11), delayed gastric emptying (n = 9), bleeding (n = 5), and deep vein thrombosis (n = 2). There was 1 postoperative mortality. Median length of hospital stay was 7 days (range, 4-69 days). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy is feasible, safe, and effective. Outcomes appear comparable with those via the open approach; however, controlled trials are needed. Despite this series representing experience within the learning curve, laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy holds promise for providing advantages seen with minimally invasive approaches in other procedures.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Mizrahi, J. D., Surana, R., Valle, J. W., & Shroff, R. T. (2020) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30974-0 · Cited by 2,559
Recent progress in pancreatic cancer
Wolfgang, C. L., Herman, J. M., Laheru, D. A., Klein, A. P., Erdek, M. A., Fishman, E. K., & Hruban, R. H. (2013) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.21190 · Cited by 910
Asbun, H. J., & Stauffer, J. A. (2012) · Journal of the American College of Surgeons · doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.08.006 · Cited by 395
250 Robotic Pancreatic Resections: Safety and Feasibility
Zureikat, A. H., Moser, A. J., Boone, B. A., Bartlett, D. L., Zenati, M., & Zeh, H. J. (2013) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e3182a4e87c · Cited by 388
Therapeutic Advances in Pancreatic Cancer
Paulson, A. S., Tran Cao, H. S., Tempero, M. A., & Lowy, A. M. (2013) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2013.01.078 · Cited by 290
Metadata
- Authors
- Kendrick, M. L., & Cusati, D.
- Venue
- Archives of Surgery
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2010-01-01
- Volume
- 145
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 19-23
- ISSN
- 0004-0010 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2144321039
- Cited by
- 352
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 13.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Total Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Feasibility and Outcome in an Early Experience. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archsurg.2009.243
- The paper
- Kendrick, M. L., & Cusati, D. (2010). Total Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Feasibility and Outcome in an Early Experience. Archives of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.2009.243
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.