International Expert Consensus on Precision Anatomy for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: PAM‐HBP Surgery Project
Daisuke Ban, Hitoe Nishino, Takao Ohtsuka, Yuichi Nagakawa, Mohammad Abu Hilal, Horacio J. Asbun, Ugo Boggi, Brian K. P. Goh, Jin He, Goro Honda, Jin‐Young Jang, Chang Moo Kang, Michael L. Kendrick, David A. Kooby, Rong Liu, Yoshiharu Nakamura, Kohei Nakata, Chinnusamy Palanivelu, Shailesh V. Shrikhande, Kyoichi Takaori, Chung‐Ngai Tang, Shin‐E Wang, Christopher L. Wolfgang, Anusak Yiengpruksawan, Yoo‐Seok Yoon, Rubén Ciria, Giammauro Berardi, Giovanni Maria Garbarino, Ryota Higuchi, Naoki Ikenaga, Yoshiya Ishikawa, Shingo Kozono, Aya Maekawa, Yoshiki Murase, Yusuke Watanabe, Giuseppe Zimmitti, F. Kunzler, Zizheng Wang, Leon Sakuma, Hiroaki Osakabe, Chie Takishita, Itaru Endo, Masao Tanaka, Hiroki Yamaue, Minoru Tanabe, Go Wakabayashi, Akihiko Tsuchida, Masafumi Nakamura
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Surgical views with high resolution and magnification have enabled us to recognize the precise anatomical structures that can be used as landmarks during minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP). This study aimed to validate the usefulness of anatomy-based approaches for MIDP before and during the Expert Consensus Meeting: Precision Anatomy for Minimally Invasive HBP Surgery (February 24, 2021). METHODS: Twenty-five international MIDP experts developed clinical questions regarding surgical anatomy and approaches for MIDP. Studies identified via a comprehensive literature search were classified using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology. Online Delphi voting was conducted after experts had drafted the recommendations, with the goal of obtaining >75% consensus. Experts discussed the revised recommendations in front of the validation committee and an international audience of 384 attendees. Finalized recommendations were made after a second round of online Delphi voting. RESULTS: Four clinical questions were addressed, resulting in 10 recommendations. All recommendations reached at least a 75% consensus among experts. CONCLUSIONS: The expert consensus on precision anatomy for MIDP has been presented as a set of recommendations based on available evidence and expert opinions. These recommendations should guide experts and trainees in performing safe MIDP and foster its appropriate dissemination worldwide.