Cargando…

Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (LEOPARD-2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Data from observational studies suggest that minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is superior to open pancreatoduodenectomy regarding intraoperative blood loss, postoperative morbidity, and length of hospital stay, without increasing total costs. However, several case-matched...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Rooij, Thijs, van Hilst, Jony, Bosscha, Koop, Dijkgraaf, Marcel G., Gerhards, Michael F., Groot Koerkamp, Bas, Hagendoorn, Jeroen, de Hingh, Ignace H., Karsten, Tom M., Lips, Daan J., Luyer, Misha D., Molenaar, I. Quintus, van Santvoort, Hjalmar C., Tran, T. C. Khé, Busch, Olivier R., Festen, Sebastiaan, Besselink, Marc G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5753506/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29298706
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2423-4
_version_ 1783290286004240384
author de Rooij, Thijs
van Hilst, Jony
Bosscha, Koop
Dijkgraaf, Marcel G.
Gerhards, Michael F.
Groot Koerkamp, Bas
Hagendoorn, Jeroen
de Hingh, Ignace H.
Karsten, Tom M.
Lips, Daan J.
Luyer, Misha D.
Molenaar, I. Quintus
van Santvoort, Hjalmar C.
Tran, T. C. Khé
Busch, Olivier R.
Festen, Sebastiaan
Besselink, Marc G.
author_facet de Rooij, Thijs
van Hilst, Jony
Bosscha, Koop
Dijkgraaf, Marcel G.
Gerhards, Michael F.
Groot Koerkamp, Bas
Hagendoorn, Jeroen
de Hingh, Ignace H.
Karsten, Tom M.
Lips, Daan J.
Luyer, Misha D.
Molenaar, I. Quintus
van Santvoort, Hjalmar C.
Tran, T. C. Khé
Busch, Olivier R.
Festen, Sebastiaan
Besselink, Marc G.
author_sort de Rooij, Thijs
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Data from observational studies suggest that minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is superior to open pancreatoduodenectomy regarding intraoperative blood loss, postoperative morbidity, and length of hospital stay, without increasing total costs. However, several case-matched studies failed to demonstrate superiority of MIPD, and large registry studies from the USA even suggested increased mortality for MIPDs performed in low-volume (<10 MIPDs annually) centers. Randomized controlled multicenter trials are lacking but clearly required. We hypothesize that time to functional recovery is shorter after MIPD compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy, even in an enhanced recovery setting. METHODS/DESIGN: LEOPARD-2 is a randomized controlled, parallel-group, patient-blinded, multicenter, phase 2/3, superiority trial in centers that completed the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group LAELAPS-2 training program for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy or LAELAPS-3 training program for robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and have performed ≥ 20 MIPDs. A total of 136 patients with symptomatic benign, premalignant, or malignant disease will be randomly assigned to undergo minimally invasive or open pancreatoduodenectomy in an enhanced recovery setting. After the first 40 patients (phase 2), the data safety monitoring board will assess safety outcomes (not blinded for treatment allocation) and decide on continuation to phase 3. Patients from phase 2 will then be included in phase 3. The primary outcome measure is time (days) to functional recovery. All patients will be blinded for the surgical approach, at least until postoperative day 5, but preferably until functional recovery has been attained. Secondary outcome measures are operative and postoperative outcomes, including clinically relevant complications, mortality, quality of life, and costs. DISCUSSION: The LEOPARD-2 trial is designed to assess whether MIPD reduces time to functional recovery, as compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy in an enhanced recovery setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register, NTR5689. Registered on 2 March 2016. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2423-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5753506
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57535062018-01-05 Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (LEOPARD-2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial de Rooij, Thijs van Hilst, Jony Bosscha, Koop Dijkgraaf, Marcel G. Gerhards, Michael F. Groot Koerkamp, Bas Hagendoorn, Jeroen de Hingh, Ignace H. Karsten, Tom M. Lips, Daan J. Luyer, Misha D. Molenaar, I. Quintus van Santvoort, Hjalmar C. Tran, T. C. Khé Busch, Olivier R. Festen, Sebastiaan Besselink, Marc G. Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Data from observational studies suggest that minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is superior to open pancreatoduodenectomy regarding intraoperative blood loss, postoperative morbidity, and length of hospital stay, without increasing total costs. However, several case-matched studies failed to demonstrate superiority of MIPD, and large registry studies from the USA even suggested increased mortality for MIPDs performed in low-volume (<10 MIPDs annually) centers. Randomized controlled multicenter trials are lacking but clearly required. We hypothesize that time to functional recovery is shorter after MIPD compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy, even in an enhanced recovery setting. METHODS/DESIGN: LEOPARD-2 is a randomized controlled, parallel-group, patient-blinded, multicenter, phase 2/3, superiority trial in centers that completed the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group LAELAPS-2 training program for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy or LAELAPS-3 training program for robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and have performed ≥ 20 MIPDs. A total of 136 patients with symptomatic benign, premalignant, or malignant disease will be randomly assigned to undergo minimally invasive or open pancreatoduodenectomy in an enhanced recovery setting. After the first 40 patients (phase 2), the data safety monitoring board will assess safety outcomes (not blinded for treatment allocation) and decide on continuation to phase 3. Patients from phase 2 will then be included in phase 3. The primary outcome measure is time (days) to functional recovery. All patients will be blinded for the surgical approach, at least until postoperative day 5, but preferably until functional recovery has been attained. Secondary outcome measures are operative and postoperative outcomes, including clinically relevant complications, mortality, quality of life, and costs. DISCUSSION: The LEOPARD-2 trial is designed to assess whether MIPD reduces time to functional recovery, as compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy in an enhanced recovery setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register, NTR5689. Registered on 2 March 2016. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2423-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-01-03 /pmc/articles/PMC5753506/ /pubmed/29298706 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2423-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
de Rooij, Thijs
van Hilst, Jony
Bosscha, Koop
Dijkgraaf, Marcel G.
Gerhards, Michael F.
Groot Koerkamp, Bas
Hagendoorn, Jeroen
de Hingh, Ignace H.
Karsten, Tom M.
Lips, Daan J.
Luyer, Misha D.
Molenaar, I. Quintus
van Santvoort, Hjalmar C.
Tran, T. C. Khé
Busch, Olivier R.
Festen, Sebastiaan
Besselink, Marc G.
Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (LEOPARD-2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (LEOPARD-2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_full Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (LEOPARD-2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (LEOPARD-2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (LEOPARD-2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_short Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (LEOPARD-2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_sort minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (leopard-2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5753506/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29298706
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2423-4
work_keys_str_mv AT derooijthijs minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT vanhilstjony minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT bosschakoop minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT dijkgraafmarcelg minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT gerhardsmichaelf minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT grootkoerkampbas minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT hagendoornjeroen minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT dehinghignaceh minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT karstentomm minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT lipsdaanj minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT luyermishad minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT molenaariquintus minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT vansantvoorthjalmarc minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT trantckhe minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT buscholivierr minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT festensebastiaan minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT besselinkmarcg minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT minimallyinvasiveversusopenpancreatoduodenectomyleopard2studyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial