Research considerations in the evaluation of minimally invasive pancreatic resection (MIPR)

Jeffrey Barkun; William Fisher; Giana Davidson; Go Wakabayashi; Marc Besselink; Henry Pitt; Jane Holt; Steve Strasberg; Charles Vollmer; David Kooby; Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Resection Organizing Committee

doi:10.1016/j.hpb.2017.01.005

Research considerations in the evaluation of minimally invasive pancreatic resection (MIPR)

HPB (Oxford). 2017 Mar;19(3):246-253. doi: 10.1016/j.hpb.2017.01.005. Epub 2017 Mar 6.

Collaborators

Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Resection Organizing Committee:
Horacio J Asbun¹¹, Jeffrey Barkun¹², Marc G H Besselink⁵, Ugo Boggi¹³, Kevin C P Conlon¹⁴, Ho-Seong Han¹⁵, Paul D Hansen¹⁶, Michael L Kendrick¹⁷, David A Kooby¹⁸, Andre L Montagnini¹⁹, C Palanivelu²⁰, Bård I Røsok²¹, Shailesh V Shrikhande²², Go Wakabayashi⁴, Herbert Zeh²³, Charles M Vollmer²⁴

Affiliations

¹ McGill University Heath Center, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. Electronic address: [email protected].
² Department of Surgery, General Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, USA.
³ University of Washington Department of Surgery, Department of Health Services, Surgical Outcomes Research Center, Seattle, USA.
⁴ Ageo Central General Hospital, Saitama, Japan.
⁵ Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
⁶ Temple University Health System, Inc., Temple University - Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Philadelphia Academy of Surgery, Philadelphia, USA.
⁷ National Pancreas Foundation, USA.
⁸ Surgery Division of General Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, VA Medical Center - St. Louis - John Cochran Division, St. Louis, USA.
⁹ The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA.
¹⁰ Emory University, Atlanta, USA.
¹¹ Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA.
¹² McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
¹³ University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
¹⁴ The University of Dublin, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
¹⁵ Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, SeongNam si, South Korea.
¹⁶ Portland Providence Cancer Center, Portland, OR, USA.
¹⁷ The Mayo Clinic - Rochester, Rochester, MN, USA.
¹⁸ Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
¹⁹ Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
²⁰ GEM Hospital & Research Center, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India.
²¹ Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
²² Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India.
²³ University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
²⁴ The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

PMID: 28274661
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2017.01.005

Abstract

The IHPBA/AHPBA-sponsored 2016 minimally invasive pancreatic resection (MIPR) conference held on April 20th, 2016 included a session designed to evaluate what would be the most appropriate scientific contribution to help define the increasing role of MIPR internationally. Participants in the conference reviewed the assessment of numerous pertinent scientific designs including randomized controlled trial (RCT), pragmatic international RCT, registry-RCT, non-RCT with propensity matching, and various types of clinical registries including those aiming to create a quality improvement data system or a learning health care system. The strengths and weaknesses of each of these designs, the status of trials which are currently recruiting patients, and pragmatic considerations were evaluated. A recommendation was made to establish a clinical registry to collect data prospectively from around the world to assess current practices and provide a framework for future studies in MIPR.

Publication types

Consensus Development Conference
Review

MeSH terms

Biomedical Research / methods*
Consensus
Data Collection
Diffusion of Innovation
Humans
Laparoscopy* / adverse effects
Pancreatectomy / adverse effects
Pancreatectomy / methods*
Pancreaticoduodenectomy / adverse effects
Pancreaticoduodenectomy / methods*
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Registries
Robotic Surgical Procedures* / adverse effects
Treatment Outcome