Patency of splenic vessels after laparoscopic spleen and splenic vessel-preserving distal pancreatectomy

Superiority of Robotic Over Laparoscopic Spleen-Preserving Distal Pancreatectomy With Warshaw Procedure for Reducing the Incidence of Postoperative Splenic Infarction

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with Warshaw procedure (MI-WP), has gained widespread recognition for the treatment of benign and low-grade malignant tumors of the pancreatic body and tail. However, the comparative advantages of the robotic Warshaw procedure (R-WP) over the laparoscopic Warshaw procedure (L-WP) remain uncertain. This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes between R-WP and L-WP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Among the 146 cases of MI-DP conducted between October 2020 and December 2023 (L-DP:115, R-DP:31), 33 cases of MI-WP were subjected to analysis, comprising the R-WP group (n=10) and the L-WP group (n=23).

RESULTS

R-WP successfully completed all procedures under a purely laparoscopic approach, whereas L-WP necessitated conversion to open surgery in 2 cases (8.7%). Despite the significantly prolonged operative time in R-WP compared with L-WP (R-WP vs. L-WP: 421vs. 300 min), there was no significant difference in estimated blood loss between the 2 groups (R-WP vs. L-WP: 19 vs. 20 mL). Although the rate of major complications did not significantly differ between the 2 groups, 2 cases (8.7%) of L-WP required reoperation, including splenectomy in 1 instance. Furthermore, the incidence of postoperative splenic infarction was significantly higher in L-WP than in R-WP (R- vs. L-WP:0 vs. 43.5%, P =0.015). The length of hospital stay after surgery did not exhibit a significant difference between the 2 groups (R-WP vs. L-WP: 11 vs. 12 d).

DISCUSSION

R-WP demonstrated superiority to L-WP for reducing the incidence of postoperative splenic infarction, potentially contributing to enhancing the spleen preservation rate.

Long-term outcomes after spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessels preservation or resection: A nationwide survey of the Japanese Society of Pancreatic Surgery

BACKGROUND

Spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy is achieved by either splenic vessel resection or splenic vessel preservation. However, the long-term outcomes of spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection and spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel preservation are not well known. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection and spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel preservation.

METHODS

The study included a total of 335 patients who underwent spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy during the study period and underwent computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging 3 and 5 years after surgery in the Japan Society of Pancreatic Surgery member institutions. We evaluated the diameter of the perigastric and gastric submucosal veins, patency of the splenic vessels, and splenic infarction. Preoperative backgrounds and short- and long-term outcomes were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Forty-four (13.1%) and 291 (86.9%) patients underwent spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection and spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel preservation, respectively. There were no significant differences in short-term outcomes between the 2 groups. Regarding long-term outcomes, the prevalence of perigastric varices was higher (P = .006), and platelet count was lower (P = .037) in the spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection group. However, other complications, such as gastric submucosal varices, postoperative splenic infarction, gastrointestinal bleeding, reoperation, postoperative splenectomy, and other hematologic parameters, were not significantly different between the 2 groups 5 years after surgery. In terms of the patency of splenic vessels in spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel preservation cases, partial or complete occlusion of the splenic artery and vein was observed 5 years after surgery in 19 (6.5%) and 55 (18.9%) patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Perigastric varices and thrombocytopenia were observed more in spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection, yet late clinical events such as gastrointestinal bleeding and splenic infarction are acceptable for spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel preservation.

Left-sided portal hypertension: Update and proposition of management algorithm

Left-sided or segmental portal hypertension (SPHT) is a rare entity, most often associated with pancreatic disease or antecedent pancreatic surgery. The starting point is splenic vein obstruction secondary to local inflammation or, less often, extrinsic compression. SPHT leads to splenomegaly and development of collateral porto-systemic venous circulation. SPHT should be suspected in patients with pancreatic history who present with episodic upper gastrointestinal bleeding and splenomegaly with normal liver function tests. The most common clinical presentation is major upper gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to rupture of esophageal and/or gastric varices. At the present time, there are no management recommendations for SPHT, particularly when the patient is asymptomatic. In patients with upper gastro-intestinal bleeding, hemostasis can be obtained either by medical or interventional means according to patient status and available resources. For symptomatic patients, splenectomy is the reference treatment. Recently, less invasive, radiologic procedures, such as splenic artery embolization, have been developed as an alternative to surgery. Additionally, sonography-guided endoscopic hemostasis can also be envisioned, leading to the diagnosis and treatment of the lesion by elastic band ligation or by glue injection into the varices during the same procedure. The goal of this article is to describe the pathophysiological mechanisms behind SPHT and its clinical manifestations and treatment, based on a review of the literature. Because of the absence of recommendations for the management of SPHT, we propose a decisional algorithm for the management of SPHT based on the literature.

Analysis of long-term outcomes after minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy under the 'Kimura-first' strategy

INTRODUCTION

Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) can be carried out by the Kimura technique (KT) or Warshaw technique (WT). This study aimed to evaluate the long-term post-operative outcomes of the two minimally invasive SPDP methods under the 'Kimura-first' strategy with a particular focus on the haemodynamic changes in the splenogastric circulation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The electronic medical records and follow-up data of patients who underwent minimally invasive SPDP in our centre from March 2016 to July 2022 were reviewed. The haemodynamic changes in splenogastric circulation were monitored by post-operative computed tomography (CT) images, and the risks they caused were assessed by long-term follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 112 patients (KT = 93 and WT = 19) were included in the study. The tumour size in the WT group was significantly larger than that in the KT group ( P = 0.02). We also found less blood loss for patients who underwent KT ( P = 0.02). The occurrence of gastric varices was significantly higher in the WT group ( P = 0.022). There was no gastrointestinal bleeding in either group. There were two cases of splenic infarction in the WT group (11.1%), and the incidence was higher than that in the KT group ( P = 0.026). The infarct area gradually decreased during periodic CT examinations and disappeared completely at the last review. The two groups of patients had similar results across the 15 items in three areas of the quality of life questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

The 'Kimura-first' strategy, in which the WT is used as an alternative to the KT when the splenic vessels cannot be safely preserved, is feasible, and safe for minimally invasive SPDP.

Comparison of Spleen-Preservation Versus Splenectomy in Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Spleen-preservation during minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) can be technically challenging and remains controversial. Our primary aim was to compare MIDP and splenectomy with spleen-preserving MIDP. Secondarily, we compared two spleen-preserving techniques.

METHODS

Adults undergoing MIDP (2007-2021) were retrospectively included in this single-center study. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes between spleen-preservation and splenectomy and between the two spleen-preserving techniques were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous data, and Fisher's exact test for categorical data.

RESULTS

Of the 293 patients who underwent MIDP, preservation of the spleen was intended in 208 (71%) patients. Spleen-preservation was achieved in 174 patients (84%) via the Warshaw technique (130; 75%) or vessel-preservation (44; 25%). The spleen-preserving group had shorter length of stay (3 vs 4 days, p < 0.01), fewer conversions to open (1 vs 12, p < 0.01) and less blood loss (p < 0.01) compared to the splenectomy group. Operative (OR) times were comparable (229 vs 214 min, p = 0.67). Except for the operative time, which was longer for the Warshaw technique (245 vs 183 min, p = 0.01), no other differences between the two spleen-preserving techniques were found. At a median follow-up of 43 (IQR 18-79) months after spleen-preservation, only 2 (1.1%) patients had required splenectomy (1 partial splenectomy for infarct/abscess after Warshaw, 1 for variceal bleeding after vessel-preserving).

CONCLUSIONS

Spleen-preservation is not associated with increased risk of blood loss, longer hospital stay, conversion, nor lengthy OR times. Late splenectomy is very rarely required. Given the immune consequences of splenectomy, spleen-preservation should be strongly considered in MIDP.

Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy from multi-port to reduced-port surgery approach

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery via the multi-port approach has become a primary surgical method for distal pancreatectomy (DP) due to its advantages of lower wound pain and superior cosmetic results. Some studies have applied reduced-port techniques for DP in an attempt to enhance cosmetic outcomes due to the minimally invasive effects. Numerous recent review studies have compared multi-port laparoscopic DP (LDP) and multi-port robotic DP (RDP); most of these studies concluded multi-port RDP is more beneficial than multi-port LDP for spleen preservation. However, there have been no comprehensive reviews of the value of reduced-port LDP and reduced-port RDP.

AIM

To search for and review the studies on spleen preservation and the clinical outcomes of minimally invasive DP that compared reduced-port DP surgery with multi-port DP surgery.

METHODS

The PubMed medical database was searched for articles published between 2013 and 2022. The search terms were implemented using the following Boolean search algorithm: ("distal pancreatectomy" OR "left pancreatectomy" OR "peripheral pancreatic resection") AND ("reduced-port" OR "single-site" OR "single-port" OR "dual-incision" OR "single-incision") AND ("spleen-preserving" OR "spleen preservation" OR "splenic preservation"). A literature review was conducted to identify studies that compared the perioperative outcomes of reduced-port LDP and reduced-port RDP.

RESULTS

Fifteen articles published in the period from 2013 to 2022 were retrieved using three groups of search terms. Two studies were added after manually searching the related papers. Finally, 10 papers were selected after removing case reports (n = 3), non-English language papers (n = 1), technique papers (n = 1), reviews (n = 1), and animal studies (n = 1). The common items were defined as items reported in more than five papers, and data on these common items were extracted from all papers. The ten studies included a total of 337 patients (females/males: 231/106) who underwent DP. In total, 166 patients (females/males, 106/60) received multi-port LDP, 126 (females/males, 90/36) received reduced-port LDP, and 45 (females/males, 35/10) received reduced-port RDP.

CONCLUSION

Reduced-port RDP leads to a lower intraoperative blood loss, a lower postoperative pancreatic fistula rate, and shorter hospital stay and follow-up duration, but has a lower spleen preservation rate.

Comparison of infectious complications after spleen preservation versus splenectomy during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors: A multicenter, propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have reported contrasting results regarding the advantages of spleen preservation during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) for preventing infectious complications.

METHODS

A total of 3787 patients who underwent LDP for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic disease in 92 centers across Korea and Japan were included in this retrospective study. Postoperative infectious complications and other complications were compared between LDP with splenectomy (LDPS) and LDP with spleen preservation (LSPDP) by propensity score matching (PSM) analysis.

RESULTS

After PSM, the LSPDP group had a lower rate of overall infectious complications (P = .079) and a significantly lower rate of intra-abdominal abscess (P = .014) compared with the LDPS group. Within the LSPDP group, the vessel preservation subgroup had a significantly higher rate of infectious complications (P = .002) compared with the vessel resection subgroup. Low-volume centers had a higher rate of intra-abdominal abscess than high-volume centers in the LSPDP group (P = .001) and the splenic vessel preservation subgroup (P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

Spleen preservation in LDP for benign or borderline malignant pancreatic diseases was advantageous in lowering the risk of infectious complications, specifically intra-abdominal abscess. However, the risk of intra-abdominal abscess may differ according to the level of surgeon's experience.

Clinical impact of inferior mesenteric vein preservation during left hemicolectomy with low ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery for distal transverse and descending colon cancers: A comparative study based on computed tomography

Purpose

Presence of a long remnant sigmoid colon after left hemicolectomy with inferior mesenteric vein (IMV) ligation for distal transverse and descending colon cancers may be a risk factor for venous ischemia. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of IMV preservation in patients who underwent left hemicolectomy with inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) preservation.

Methods

We included 155 patients who underwent left hemicolectomy with IMA preservation for distal transverse and descending colon cancers from 2003 to 2020. Technical success of IMV preservation was determined by assessing pre- and post-operative patency of the IMV on computed tomography (CT) by an abdominal radiologist. Intestinal complications comprising ulceration, stricture, venous engorgement, and colitis in remnant colon were compared between the IMV preservation and ligation groups.

Results

IMV was preserved in 22 (14.2%) and ligated in 133 (85.8%) patients. Surgical time, postoperative recovery outcomes, and number of harvested lymph nodes were similar in both groups. The technical success of IMV preservation was 81.8%. Intestinal complications were less common in the preservation group than in the IMV ligation group (4.5% vs. 23.3%, P=0.048). The complications in the IMV ligation group were anastomotic ulcer (n=2), anastomotic stricture (n=4), venous engorgement of the remnant distal colon (n=4), and colitis in the distal colon (n=21).

Conclusions

IMV preservation may be beneficial after left hemicolectomy with IMA preservation for distal transverse and descending colon cancers. We suggest that IMV preservation might be considered when long remnant sigmoid colon is expected during left hemicolectomy with low ligation of IMA.

Comparison of splenic vessel preserving distal pancreatectomy and the Warshaw technique for solid pseudopapillary neoplasm in children

PURPOSE

Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) such as splenic vessel preservation (SVP) for solid pseudopapillary neoplasms (SPNs) in the body or tail of the pancreas in children prevents post-splenectomy infection and hematologic disorders. However, SVP could be technically challenging, and the Warshaw technique (WT) could be an alternative technique that has been reported to be safe and effective in adults. We, therefore, compared the perioperative outcomes of SVP and WT in pediatric patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of pediatric patients with SPN who underwent SPDP using SVP or WT between November 2002 and November 2018 at a large-sized tertiary referral center.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were included. Sixteen (57.1%) patients underwent SVP and 12 (42.9%) patients underwent WT. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between the two groups. Postoperative complications occurred in 8 patients each in the SVP (50%), and the WT (66.7%) groups. Two (12.5%) in the SVP group and 1 (8.3%) in the WT group required additional intervention. During a median follow-up duration of 49 months, there were no significant differences in the incidence of splenic infarctions or perigastric varices between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in the surgical outcomes between WT and SVP in pediatric patients with SPN. WT could be a safe and feasible alternative technique for SVP in challenging cases.

Spleen-preserving total pancreatectomy and islet autotransplantation with complete preservation of the splenic arterial and venous supply does not impact islet yield and function

BACKGROUND

Standard total pancreatectomy and islet autotransplantation (TPIAT) for chronic pancreatitis includes splenectomy, but TPIAT can be performed without splenectomy by full preservation of the blood supply to the spleen.

METHODS

We compared the metabolic and clinical outcomes of patients who underwent TPIAT at our center between 2015 and 2021 with or without splenectomy. A total of 89 patients were included in the study, and 17 of them underwent spleen-preserving total pancreatectomy (SPTP).

RESULTS

The two study groups had similar demographic and metabolic parameters. Short-term morbidity and long-term outcomes were similar. The operative time was significantly shorter with splenectomy: a median of 9.91 h (interquartile range [IQR] 8.89-10.83) compared to 10.78 h (IQR 10.2-11.6) for SPTP (P = 0.021). There was no difference between the groups in postoperative morbidity. Metabolic outcomes at 1 year were better in the SPTP group compared to the splenectomy group, with a median daily insulin requirement of 7 units (IQR 4-12) vs 15 units (IQR 7-26; P = 0.049) and a median C-peptide at 1 year of 0.65 (IQR 0.40-1.26) vs 1.00 (IQR 0.80-1.90; P = 0.63). The reduction in morphine milligram equivalents per day over time was significantly better in the SPTP group (P < 0.001), as was the decrease in pain score (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

TPIAT with full arterial and venous preservation of the spleen had no adverse impact on islet yield or function. TPIAT can be safely and effectively performed with preservation of the spleen and the entire splenic artery and vein. The spleen should be preserved when feasible in every TPIAT surgery.

Precision vascular anatomy for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is increasingly performed worldwide; however, the surgical anatomy required to safely perform MIDP has not yet been fully considered. This review evaluated the literature concerning peripancreatic vascular anatomy, which is considered important to conduct safe MIDP.

METHODS

A database search of PubMed and Ichushi (Japanese) was conducted. Qualified studies investigating the anatomical variations of peripancreatic vessels related to MIDP were evaluated using SIGN methodology.

RESULTS

Of 701 articles yielded by our search strategy, 76 articles were assessed in this systematic review. The important vascular anatomy required to recognize MIDP included the pancreatic parenchymal coverage on the root and the running course of the splenic artery, branching patterns of the splenic artery, confluence positions of the left gastric vein and the inferior mesenteric vein, forms of pancreatic veins including the centro-inferior pancreatic vein, characteristics of the left renal vein, and collateral routes perfusing the spleen following Warshaw's technique. Very few articles evaluating the relationship between the anatomical variations and surgical outcomes of MIDP were found.

CONCLUSIONS

The precise knowledge of peripancreatic vessels is important to adequately complete MIDP. More detailed anatomic analyses and descriptions will benefit surgeons and their patients who are facing these operations.

Current status and perspectives of the future of pancreatic surgery: Establishment of evidence by integration of "art" and "science"

Pancreatic cancer surgery continues to be associated with a high operative morbidity rate, poor long-term survival outcomes, and various challenges in obtaining high-level evidence. Not only is the early postoperative morbidity rate high, but also late morbidity involves lifelong nutritional support for long-term survivors. Due to poor survival outcomes even after curative surgery, pancreatic surgeons have doubts about the role of surgery as the definitive treatment for pancreatic cancer. Additionally, conducting clinical trials to obtain high-level evidence in the field of pancreatic surgery is difficult, and the results have only had a moderate impact on clinical practice due to skepticism regarding their quality. Therefore, quality evidence regarding the extent of resection, mode of approach to dissection, reconstruction methods for pancreatico-enteric anastomosis, determination of resectability, timing of surgery, and the definition of the resection margin is lacking. However, numerous innovative pancreatic surgical procedures have been developed, which may aptly have been called "art" when they were first introduced, regardless of whether they subsequently were supported by scientific evidence. In this review, we provide recent examples of the integration of art and science in the field of pancreatic surgery, which illustrate how the creative ideas of pancreatic surgeons evolved into generally accepted clinical practice. Pancreatic surgeons should be considered "surgical artists," "surgical scientists," and "surgical practitioners." We look forward to more "surgical artists" educating future "surgical artists and scientists" to create a richer "spirit of innovation," leading to a more beautiful integration of art and science in the field of pancreatic surgery.

Short- and long-term outcomes after minimally invasive versus open spleen-saving distal pancreatectomies

Introduction:

This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (MI-SPDP) versus open surgery SPDP (O-SPDP). It also aimed to determine the long-term vascular patency after spleen-saving vessel-preserving distal pancreatectomies (SSVDPs).

Methods:

A retrospective review of 74 patients who underwent successful SPDP and met the study criteria was performed. Of these, 67 (90.5%) patients underwent SSVDP, of which 38 patients (21 open, 17 MIS) had adequate long-term post-operative follow-up imaging to determine vascular patency.

Results:

Fifty-one patients underwent open SPDP, whereas 23 patients underwent minimally invasive SPDP, out of which 10 (43.5%) were laparoscopic and 13 (56.5%) were robotic. Patients who underwent MI-SPDP had significantly longer operative time (307.5 vs. 162.5 min, P = 0.001) but shorter hospital stay (5 vs. 7 days, P = 0.021) and lower median blood loss (100 vs. 200 cc, P = 0.046) compared to that of O-SPDP. Minimally-invasive spleen-saving vessel-preserving distal pancreatectomy (MI-SSVDP) was associated with poorer long-term splenic vein patency rates compared to O-SSVDP (P = 0.048). This was particularly with respect to partial occlusion of the splenic vein, and there was no significant difference between the complete splenic vein occlusion rates between the MIS group and open group (29.4% vs. 28.6%, P = 0.954). The operative time was statistically significantly longer in patients who underwent robotic surgery versus laparoscopic surgery (330 vs. 173 min, P = 0.008).

Conclusion:

Adoption of MI-spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) is safe and feasible. MI-SPDP is associated with a shorter hospital stay, lower blood loss but longer operation time compared to O-SPDP. In the present study, MI-SSVDP was associated with poorer long-term splenic vein patency rates compared to O-SSVDP.

A retrospective comparative study of robotic distal pancreatectomy with or without splenic vessel and spleen preservation

BACKGROUND

Robotic distal pancreatectomy has been accepted to be safe and effective for pancreatic tail lesion. Whether spleen preservation by preserving the splenic vessels with robot assistance is feasible and beneficial remains controversial. Here we would like to compare the operative outcomes of robotic distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy (DPS) with robotic spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy by means of splenic vessel preservation (SVP).

METHODS

Between March 2011 and September 2019, 56 consecutive patients undergoing robotic distal pancreatectomy were identified, with 28 patients in each group. Patient demographics, histopathology findings and operative outcomes were prospectively collected and compared between the two groups. A subgroup analysis was made after excluding malignant and pancreatic lesions >6 cm in the DPS group.

RESULTS

The two groups had similar conversion rate, blood loss, morbidity and pancreatic fistula rate. There was no operative mortality. The SVP group had shorter median operative time (245 vs 303.5 min, P = 0.019) and shorter median hospital stay (5 vs 6 days, P = 0.019) than the DPS group. However, all malignant lesions occurred in the DPS group and lesion size in DPS group was significantly larger. After matching, there were 28 SVP and 15 DPS. The histopathology findings and lesion size became comparable. The SVP group still had shorter operative time (245 vs 290 min, P = 0.022) and shorter hospital stay (5 vs 7 days, P = 0.014) than the DPS group.

CONCLUSION

Apart from avoiding risk of overwhelming postsplenectomy sepsis, robotic SVP had additional advantage of shorter operative time and shorter hospital stay than robotic DPS.

Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Organ-Sparing Resection for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PNENs) are rare neoplasms associated with a long life expectancy after resection. In this setting, patients may benefit from laparoscopic organ-sparing resection. Studies of laparoscopic organ-sparing resection for PNENs are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic organ-sparing resection for PNENs.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed for patients with PNENs who underwent laparoscopic organ-sparing pancreatectomy between March 2005 and May 2018. The patients' demographic data, operative results, pathological reports, hospital courses and morbidity, mortality, and follow-up data (until August 2018) were analysed.

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients were included in the final analysis. There were 9 male and 26 female patients, with a median age of 46 years (range 25-75 years). The mean BMI was 24.6 ± 3.3 kg/m². Nine patients received laparoscopic enucleation (LE), 20 received laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP), and 6 received laparoscopic central pancreatectomy. The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, transfusion rate, and postoperative hospital stay were 186.4 ± 60.2 min, 165 ± 73.0 ml, 0 days, and 9 days (range 5-23 days), respectively. The morbidity rate, grade ≥ III complication rate, and grade ≥ B pancreatic fistula rate were 34.2%, 11.4%, and 8.7%, respectively, with no mortality. The rate of follow-up was 94.3%, and the median follow-up time was 55 months (range 3-158 months). One patient developed recurrence 36 months after LE and was managed with surgical resection. The other patients survived without metastases or recurrence during the follow-up. One patient had diabetes after LSPDP, and no patients had symptoms of pancreatic exocrine insufficiency. Nineteen patients who underwent LSPDP (16 with the Kimura technique and 3 with the Warshaw technique) were followed. Normal patency of the splenic artery and vein was observed in 14 and 14 patients within 1 month of surgery and in 15 and 14 patients 6 months or more after the operation, respectively. Partial splenic infarction was observed in 3 patients within 1 month of surgery and in no patients 6 months or more after the operation. Three patients eventually developed collateral venous vessels around the gastric fundus and reserved spleen, with one case of variceal bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic organ-sparing resection for selected cases of PNENs is safe and feasible and has favourable short- and long-term outcomes.

Postoperative risk of pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy with or without spleen preservation

INTRODUCTION

Outcomes after distal pancreatectomy with or without splenectomy are controversial. The present study aims to investigate differences in short-term and long-term outcomes between spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) and distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS).

METHODS

In this retrospective review of consecutive patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy with or without splenectomy from January 2011 until December 2017 for benign disease, the primary endpoint was to compare postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The secondary endpoint was to compare duration of surgery, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing SPDP had a lower rate of POPF (13.6% vs 46.1%; p = 0.02). Patients undergoing SPDP (n = 22) were discharged earlier than patients undergoing DPS (n = 26) (8 [4-29] vs 12 [6.48] days; p = 0.003). No differences in other intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were found between groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing SPDP developed fewer POPF and were discharged earlier compared to patients undergoing DPS.

Position of the Pancreas Division Line and Postoperative Outcomes After Distal Pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

In distal pancreatectomy (DP), the position of the pancreas division line (PDL) changes depending on the location or nature of the tumor. Here, we investigated the relationship between PDL and postoperative complications after DP.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data of 140 patients who underwent DP at Tokyo Medical and Dental University Hospital between January 2011 and September 2018. PDL was defined as the distance from the left margin of the portal vein to the edge of the pancreatic stump on the coronal plane of computed tomography.

RESULTS

The mean PDL was 15.1 (range 0-74.3) mm. PDL was significantly longer in patients with portal venous system thrombosis (PVST) than in those without PVST (47.6 vs. 0 mm, p < 0.001). The PDLlong (≥ 20 mm) group underwent surgery with a significantly shorter duration (253 vs. 294 min, p < 0.001) and experienced a lower volume of blood loss (20 vs. 256.5 mL, p < 0.001) than the PDLshort (< 20 mm) group. Six months after surgery, the increase in HbA1c level was significantly higher in the PDLshort group than in the PDLlong group (0.5 vs. 0.35%, p = 0.041). Except for PVST, there was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In DP, pancreas resection with a longer PDL resulted in a significantly shorter duration of surgery, lower estimated blood loss, and superior glucose tolerance than that with a shorter PDL.

Dual-Incision Laparoscopic Spleen-Preserving Distal Pancreatectomy: Merits Compared to the Conventional Method

BACKGROUND

Herein, we assess the safety and feasibility of dual-incision laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (DILSPDP) through lateral approach with reduced trocars for benign and low-grade malignancy in pancreas tail. We compare DILSPDP with surgical outcomes of conventional laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP).

METHODS

Patients with benign pancreas tail mass that had been scheduled for LSPDP were selected to undergo DILSPDP. These patients had spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with the dissection in lateral-to-medial fashion using a multichannel trocar in the right lateral decubitus position of patient. We compared the demographics and operative outcomes of DILSPDP with those of conventional LSPDP which was performed with dissection in medial-to-lateral fashion using four or five trocars in supine position.

RESULTS

Twenty two cases of DILSPDP and 26 cases of conventional LSPDP were reviewed. There was no difference in terms of demographic features including diagnosis or tumor size, although the location of the tumor was fundamentally different between the two groups. Significantly shorter operative times and reduced blood loss were observed in DILSPDP group (p = 0.004 and 0.011, respectively) and the preservation of splenic vessels was more successful with DILSPDP than conventional surgery (95.5% vs. 65.4%, p = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

DILSPDP appears to be a feasible method of spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy for benign or low-malignancy of pancreas tail and is accompanied by advantages in terms of splenic vessel preservation and reduced parietal trauma.

Spleen Preservation in Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy for Solid Pseudopapillary Neoplasm is Oncologically Safe

Purpose

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has been widely performed for solid pseudopapillary neoplasm (SPN) involving the body or tail of the pancreas. However, it has not been established whether spleen preservation in LDP is oncologically safe for the treatment of SPN with malignant potential. In this study, we compared the short- and long-term outcomes between patients with SPN who underwent laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) vs laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (LDPS).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 46 patients with SPN who underwent LDP between January 2005 and November 2016. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to spleen preservation: the LSPDP group (n=32) and the LDPS group (n=14). Clinicopathologic characteristics and perioperative outcomes were compared between groups.

Results

There were no significant differences in pathologic variables, including tumor size, tumor location, node status, angiolymphatic invasion, or perineural invasion between groups. Median operating time was significantly longer in the LSPDP group vs the LDPS group (243 vs 172 minutes; p=0.006). Estimated intraoperative blood loss was also significantly greater in the LSPDP group (310 vs 167 ml; p=0.063). There were no significant differences in incidence of postoperative complications (≥ Clavien-Dindo class IIIa) or pancreatic fistula between groups. After a median follow-up of 35 months (range, 3~153 months), there was no recurrence or disease-specific mortality in either group.

Conclusion

The results show that LSPDP is an oncologically safe procedure for SPN involving the body or tail of the pancreas.

Male gender and increased body mass index independently predicts clinically relevant morbidity after spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy

AIM

To identify risk factors for clinically relevant complications after spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP). No previous studies explored potential predictors of morbidity after SPDP.

METHODS

The data of 41 patients who underwent a SPDP in a single surgical center between 2000 and 2015 were retrospectively reviewed from a prospectively maintained electronic database established in our Department of Surgery. The database included demographic, clinical, bioumoral, pathological, intraoperative and postoperative parameters. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed to assess potential predictors of clinically relevant morbidity. Postoperative morbidity was defined as in-hospital complications and mortality was assessed at 90 d. Clinically relevant morbidity was defined as complication ≥ grade 2 Dindo.

RESULTS

Overall morbidity rate was 34.1% (14 patients): grade I (6 patients, 14.6%), grade II (2 patients, 4.8%), grade IIIa (1 patient, 2.4%), and grade IIIb (5 patients, 12.2%). A number of 5 patients (12.2%) required re-laparotomy for postoperative complications. There was no postoperative mortality. Thus, at least one clinically relevant complication occurred in 8 patients (19.5%). Univariate analysis identified male gender (P = 0.034), increased body mass index (P = 0.002) and neuroendocrine pathology (P = 0.013) as statistically significant risk factors. Multivariate analysis identified male gender [odds ratio (OR): 1.29, 95%CI: 1.07-1.55, P = 0.005] and increased body mass index (OR: 23.18, 95%CI: 1.72-310.96, P = 0.018) as the only independent risk factors of clinically relevant morbidity after SPDP.

CONCLUSION

Male gender and increased body mass index are independently associated with increased risk of clinically relevant morbidity after SPDP. These findings may assist a surgeon in clinical decision-making to better select patients suitable for SPDP.

A case of complete splenic infarction after laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP), a newly developed operative procedure, is indicated for benign and low-grade malignant disease of the pancreas. However, few studies have reported on postoperative splenic infarction after LSPDP.

CASE PRESENTATION

We report a case of complete splenic infarction and obliteration of the splenic artery and vein after LSPDP. The patient was a 69-year-old woman with a 35-mm cystic tumor of the pancreatic body who underwent LSPDP. Although the operation was completed with preservation of the splenic artery and vein, postoperative splenic infarction was revealed with left back pain and fluid collection around the stump of the pancreas on postoperative day 9. Fortunately, clinical symptoms disappeared within days and additional splenectomy was not needed. Splenic infarction was attributed to scattered micro-embolizations within the spleen after drawing strongly on the tape encircling the splenic vessels.

CONCLUSION

Preserving splenic vessels in LSPDP is a demanding procedure. To prevent splenic infarction in LSPDP, we should carefully isolate the pancreatic parenchyma from the splenic vessels, and must avoid drawing tightly on the vessel loop encircling splenic vessels.

Splenic vessel patency: is it real menace to perform laparoscopic splenic vessel-preserving distal pancreatectomy

Purpose

This study compared the patency of the splenic vessels between laparoscopic and open spleen and splenic vessel-preserving distal pancreatectomy.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed a database of 137 patients who underwent laparoscopic (n = 91) or open (n = 46) spleen and splenic vessel-preserving distal pancreatectomy at a single institute from 2001 through 2015. Splenic vessel patency was assessed by abdominal computed tomography and classified into three grades according to the degree of stenosis.

Results

The splenic artery patency rate was similar in both groups (97.8 vs. 95.7%, P = 0.779). Also, the splenic vein patency rate was not significantly different between the 2 groups (74.7% vs. 82.6%, P = 0.521). Postoperative wound complication was significantly lower in the laparoscopic group (19.8% vs. 28.3%, P = 0.006), and hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group (7 days vs. 9 days, P = 0.001) than in the open group. Median follow-up periods were 22 months (3.7–96.2 months) and 31.7 months (4–104 months) in the laparoscopic and open groups, respectively.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy showed good splenic vessel patency as well as open distal pancreatectomy. For this reason, splenic vessel patency is not an obstacle in performing laparoscopic splenic vessel-preserving distal pancreatectomy.

Robotic-assisted spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy: a technical review

Minimally-invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy is indicated for benign or borderline malignant lesions confined to the pancreatic body and tail. With the introduction of the da Vinci robotic system, preliminary case series have suggested an improved spleen preservation rate, higher rate of margin negative resections and improved lymph node yield versus the standard laparoscopic approach. In this article, we described our approach to robotic-assisted distal pancreatectomy with both vessel-conserving (Kimura) and vessel-sacrificing (Warshaw) variations.

Splenic vessel preservation versus splenic vessel resection in laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy for low-grade malignant pancreas tumours was recently demonstrated and can be performed with splenic vessel preservation (SVP) or splenic vessel resection (SVR). Whether one approach is superior to another is still a matter of debate.

METHODS

A systematic literature search (PubMed, Embase, Science Citation Index, Springer-Link and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) was performed. Pooled intra- and post-operative outcomes were evaluated. Stratified and sensitivity analyses were performed to explore heterogeneity between studies and to assess the effects of the study qualities.

RESULTS

A total of six studies were included. There was no significant difference for SVR and SVP in terms of overall post-operative complications and the pooled odds ratio (OR) was 0.87 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.38, I² = 25%). Meta-analysis on the pooled outcome of intraoperative operative time and blood loss favoured SVR; the mean differences were 18.64 min (95% CI 6.91-30.37 min, I² = 21%) and 65.67 mL (95% CI 18.88-112.45 mL, I² = 48%), respectively. Subgroup analysis showed a decrease incidences in perigastric varices (OR = 0.07, 95% CI 0.03-0.18, I² = 29%) and splenic infarction (OR = 0.16, 95% CI 0.08-0.32, I² = 0%) in SVP.

CONCLUSION

For selected patients who underwent laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy, an increased preference for the SVP technique should be suggested considering its short-term benefits. However, in case of large tumours that distort and compress vessel course, SVR could be applied with acceptable splenic ischaemia and perigastric varices.

A single institution's 21-year experience with surgically resected pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: an analysis of survival and prognostic factors

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) comprise a heterogeneous group of tumors with a varied biological behavior. In the present study, we analyzed the experience of 79 pNETs resected between 1999 and 2014. The pathologic prognostic factors (European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society, ENETS; and AJCC) classification, vascular invasion (VI), proliferation index (ki-67) and the presence of necrosis were retrospectively reviewed.

METHODS

The clinical data of 79 patients with pNETs who underwent surgery were retrospectively analyzed. Mortality rates and Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to evaluate survival over time for pathologic stages, tumor functionality, and vascular invasion. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate the hazard ratio regarding ENETS, AJCC staging, sex, tumor functionality and vascular invasion.

RESULTS

The male:female ratio was 40:39. Twenty-one patients (26%) had functional tumors and 58 (73.4%) had non-functional tumors, of which 35 (44.3%) were diagnosed incidentally. Seventeen Whipple procedures, 46 distal pancreatectomies (including 26 laparoscopic and 20 open procedures), 8 laparoscopic central pancreatectomies, 1 laparoscopic resection of the uncinated process and 7 enucleations (one laparoscopic) were performed. Vascular invasion and necrosis were observed in 29 of 75 cases (38.6%) and in 16 cases (29%), respectively. The comparison between survivor functions of ENETS staging categories showed statistically significant differences (p = 0.042). Mortality rate was higher in patients with non-functioning tumors compared with hormonally functioning tumors (p = 0.052) and in those with vascular invasion (p = 0.186).

CONCLUSIONS

In spite of the heterogeneity of pNETs, the ENETS TNM classification efficiently predicts long-term prognosis. The non-functioning tumors and the presence of vascular invasion are associated with poor prognosis.

Splenic vein turndown for vascular reconstruction following pancreatic cancer resection in patients with high risk profile

Introduction: Vascular reconstruction is utilized following resections for pancreatic cancers with borderline resectability. This is defined by venous or partial superior mesenteric artery (SMA) involvement, where vessels are resected en bloc to achieve an R0 resection. There are many vascular reconstruction techniques post en bloc R0 resection, each with its own complication profile. The splenic turndown technique separates the vascular anastomosis from the pancreatic anastomosis, reducing the risk of vascular disruption should a pancreatic leak occur. Case Report: This is the first report in literature of the splenic vein turndown technique being utilized for vascular reconstruction post- pancreatic resection for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. To date, splenic vein turndown repair has only been described in a trauma setting. In this case, splenic vein turndown was preferred as the patient was on long-term corticosteroids with a high risk of anastomotic leak. Conclusion: This case report showing that splenic vein turndown technique is a feasible option for vascular reconstruction post-pancreatic resection. The main disadvantage of this technique is high risk of segmental portal hypertension if the spleen is not removed concomitantly. For this reason, its utility should be restricted to patients at high risk of pancreatic leak.

Gastric bleeding risk following spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy with excision of the splenic vessels: a long-term follow-up

BACKGROUND

Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with resection of the splenic vessels (VR-SPDP) is an effective procedure. However, hemodynamic changes in splenogastric circulation may lead to the development of gastric varices (GV) with a risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. This retrospective study aimed to assess the long-term postoperative clinical follow-up of patients and review the late postoperative abdominal computed tomography (CT) or endoscopic examination.

METHODS

From 1988 to 2015, 48 consecutive VR-SPDP for benign or low-grade malignant disease were included. Late postoperative follow-up was undertaken with the use of a prospective database and assessment undertaken by CT and/or endoscopy.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 76 months (range: 12-334 months). Two patients were lost to follow-up. Gastrointestinal hemorrhage occurred in one patient. Endoscopy and abdominal CT showed submucosal GV in five patients. Ten patients had perigastric varices (27%), but none developed clinical complications from their varices. All varices occurred within one year after distal pancreatectomy and remained stable during follow-up.

DISCUSSION

Asymptomatic varices frequently occurred in patients who underwent VR-SPDP, but bleeding risk seemed low. Abdominal CT could identify GV and distinguish submucosal varices with a higher risk of gastric bleeding.

Laparoscopic surgery for pancreatic neoplasms: the European association for endoscopic surgery clinical consensus conference

BACKGROUND

Introduced more than 20 years ago, laparoscopic pancreatic surgery (LAPS) has not reached a uniform acceptance among HPB surgeons. As a result, there is no consensus regarding its use in patients with pancreatic neoplasms. This study, organized by the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES), aimed to develop consensus statements and clinical recommendations on the application of LAPS in these patients.

METHODS

An international panel of experts was selected based on their clinical and scientific expertise in laparoscopic and open pancreatic surgery. Each panelist performed a critical appraisal of the literature and prepared evidence-based statements assessed by other panelists during Delphi process. The statements were further discussed during a one-day face-to-face meeting followed by the second round of Delphi. Modified statements were presented at the plenary session of the 24th International Congress of the EAES in Amsterdam and in a web-based survey.

RESULTS

LAPS included laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD), enucleation, central pancreatectomy, and ultrasound. In general, LAPS was found to be safe, especially in experienced hands, and also advantageous over an open approach in terms of intraoperative blood loss, postoperative recovery, and quality of life. Eighty-five percent or higher proportion of responders agreed with the majority (69.5%) of statements. However, the evidence is predominantly based on retrospective case-control studies and systematic reviews of these studies, clearly affected by selection bias. Furthermore, no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been published to date, although four RCTs are currently underway in Europe.

CONCLUSIONS

LAPS is currently in its development and exploration stages, as defined by the international IDEAL framework for surgical innovation. LDP is feasible and safe, performed in many centers, while LPD is limited to few centers. RCTs and registry studies are essential to proceed with the assessment of LAPS.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy combined with laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for the treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor with early gastric cancer: Report of a case

•

In a distal pancreatectomy combined with a distal gastrectomy, the splenic artery and vein must be conserved.

•

We performed a HALS-SPDP combined with a LDG for the treatment of a pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor with early gastric cancer.

•

Six months after surgery, an enhanced computed tomography scan revealed the patency of the splenic artery and vein.

•

An HALS-SPDP combined with an LDG is beneficial and safe for the patients who have a pancreatic low-grade malignant tumor and gastric cancer.

Introduction

In a distal pancreatectomy combined with a distal gastrectomy, the splenic artery and vein must be conserved. However, it is not easy in pure laparoscopic surgery. We performed a hand-assisted laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (HALS-SPDP) combined with a laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) for the treatment of a pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (NET) with early gastric cancer.

Presentation of case

A 67-year-old male was hospitalized with no complaint. He was diagnosed with a pancreatic tail tumor (1.5 cm in diameter) and early gastric cancer. He had undergone an endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The pathohistology of the dissected tissue demonstrated that the histology was moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma, and the depth of the gastric cancer was pT1b2 (submucosal layer ∼1000 μm). First, a pancreatectomy was performed extracorporeally under direct vision after detaching the spleen and the distal pancreas from the retroperitoneum under a hand-assisted laparoscopy. After the distal pancreatectomy, an LDG with a D1 lymphadenectomy was performed intracorporeally. The postoperative course was not eventful. Six months after surgery, an enhanced computed tomography (CT) scan revealed the patency of the splenic artery.

Conclusion

An HALS-SPDP combined with an LDG is beneficial and safe for the patients who have a pancreatic benign or low-grade malignant tumor and gastric cancer.

Minimally Invasive Approach for Spleen-Preserving Distal Pancreatectomy: a Comparative Analysis of Postoperative Complication Between Splenic Vessel Conserving and Warshaw's Technique

BACKGROUND

Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with Warshaw's technique (WT) was reported to have higher spleen-related complication. The aim of this study was to evaluate the postoperative complication between the splenic vessel-conserving technique (SVC) and the WT when they were performed by the minimally invasive approach.

METHODS

From January 2006 to June 2015, data of the patients who had laparoscopic or robotic-assisted spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy for benign or borderline malignant tumors were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into SVC and the WT group for comparison.

RESULTS

Of the 89 patients who had the spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy, 63 were SVC, whereas 26 were WT. The CT scans showed that patients who had WT were found to have higher rate of splenic infarction (P < 0.001) and had significantly higher rate of collateral vessel formation at 1 year (P < 0.001). All the splenic infarctions were low grade and asymptomatic which resolved spontaneously. None of the patients with collateral formation experienced gastrointestinal bleeding. The postoperative complication of SVC and WT did not differ significantly.

CONCLUSION

SVC and WT were found to have comparable outcome. Both techniques can be used to achieve higher spleen-preserving rate.

Minimally Invasive Surgery for Pancreatic Disease - Current Status

Laparoscopic procedures have advanced to represent the new gold standard in many surgical fields. Although application in pancreatic surgery is hampered by the friable nature of the gland and the difficulty of its exposure, advanced technology and surgeons' experience are leading to an expansion of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery. Addressing the whole range of main operative procedures, this review analyzes the literature data so far to give an overview about the current status of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery, its indications and limitations. In acute pancreatitis, a step-up approach from percutaneous drainage to retroperitoneoscopic necrosectomy seems beneficial. Transgastric necrosectomy also preserves the retroperitoneal compartment in contrast to the laparoscopic approach, which has widely been abandoned. In tumor pathology, laparoscopic access is adequate for small benign lesions in the pancreatic tail and body. Oncological outcome shows to be at least equal to the open procedure. Concerning laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy, there is no evidence for a patients' benefit currently although several studies prove that it can be done.

Strategic Approach to the Splenic Artery in Laparoscopic Spleen-preserving Distal Pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) is an ideal procedure in selected patients with benign or low-grade malignant tumors in the body/tail of the pancreas. We describe our procedure and experience with splenic vessel-preserving LSPDP (SVP-LSPDP) in a retrospective case series.

METHODS

Six consecutive patients underwent SVP-LSPDP from January 2011 to September 2013. We evaluated the courses of the splenic artery by preoperative computed tomography and applied an individualized approach (the superior approach or inferior approach) to the splenic artery.

RESULTS

All of the operations were successful. The median surgical duration was 249 minutes. The median blood loss was 0 mL. Pathologic examination revealed 4 cases of insulinoma, 1 case of solid pseudopapillary tumor, and 1 case of pancreatic metastasis from renal carcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

In performing SVP-LSPDP, it is effective to make a strategic choice between 2 different approaches according to the course of splenic artery.

Study on laparoscopic spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy procedures comparing splenic vessel preservation and non-preservation

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to investigate whether two types of laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (Lap-SPDP) techniques are being implemented safely. The study compares the clinical outcomes from laparoscopic Warshaw operation (Lap-W) with those from laparoscopic splenic vessels preserving SPDP (Lap-SPDP-VP) and considers the role of those operations.

METHODS

On August 2013, the Warshaw technique was introduced to our institution and 17 patients with a lesion in the distal pancreas who underwent Lap-SPDP by December 2015 were enrolled. Six patients who underwent a Lap-W and 11 patients who underwent a Lap-SPDP-VP were investigated retrospectively.

RESULTS

In the Lap-W and Lap-SPDP-VP patients, the sizes of the tumors were 46.5±31.2 and 25.7±14.9 mm [Probability (P) value =0.0913)]; the operative times were 287 min (range, 225-369 min) and 280 min (range, 200-496 min); the blood loss was 95 mL (range, 50-200 mL) and 60 mL (range, 0-650 mL); the length of the postoperative hospital stay was 12 days (range, 8-43 days) and 11 days (range, 7-28 days); median follow-up was 19 months (range, 13-28 months) and 23 months (range, 6-28 months), respectively. There was no case of symptomatic spleen infarction in either group. However, partial infarctions of the spleen without symptoms were observed by computed tomography in three out of six cases (50%) in the Lap-W. No patient required reoperation and the postoperative mortality was zero in both groups. All patients were alive and recurrence-free at the end of the follow-up period. Collateral veins around the spleen developed in 83.3% (five out of six patients) in the Lap-W and developed in 12.5% (one out of eight patients) in the Lap-SPDP-VP. A significant difference was observed between groups (P=0.0256). Gastric varices developed in 33.3% (two out of six patients) in the Lap-W. However, no case of rupture of varices, or other late phase complications was observed in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the Lap-W and Lap-SPDP-VP were found to be safe and effective, and in cases in which the detachment work of the splenic vessels from the tumor or the pancreatic parenchyma is difficult, performing Lap-W, rather than Lap-SPDP-VP, is considered appropriate. While Lap-SPDP is recommended for patients with benign or low grade malignant diseases, long-term follow-up to monitor hemodynamic changes in splenogastric circulation is considered needed.

Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery for benign and malignant disease

Laparoscopic surgery for benign and malignant pancreatic lesions has slowly been gaining acceptance over the past decade and is being introduced in many centres. Some studies suggest that this approach is equivalent to or better than open surgery, but randomized data are needed to assess outcomes. In this Review, we aim to provide a comprehensive overview of the state of the art in laparoscopic pancreatic surgery by aggregating high-quality published evidence. Various aspects, including the benefits, limitations, oncological efficacy, learning curve and latest innovations, are discussed. The focus is on laparoscopic Whipple procedure and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for both benign and malignant disease, but robot-assisted surgery is also addressed. Surgical and oncological outcomes are discussed as well as quality of life parameters and the cost efficiency of laparoscopic pancreatic surgery. We have also included decision-aid algorithms based on the literature and our own expertise; these algorithms can assist in the decision to perform a laparoscopic or open procedure.

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy in a solitary true pancreatic cyst

BACKGROUND

Solitary true pancreatic cysts (STPCs), or epithelial cysts, are benign lesions that are extremely rare in adult patients. Advances in radiographic techniques have improved the ability to identify pancreatic cystic lesions. We report a case of a large and symptomatic STPC in a 47-year-old female patient who was treated successfully with spleen-preserving laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. We also review the clinical and pathologic features of all reported STPCs within the past 25 years.

DATABASE

To compose the review, we did a search of the international literature for STPCs that had occurred in adults. Fourteen related articles were found describing cases of STPCs. Clinical and pathologic information was collected for all of the reported pancreatic cysts, and a database was formed. STPCs are detected more frequently in women than in men. The mean age of occurrence is 43.2 years, and the mean cyst size is 5.6 cm. Fifty percent of true cysts are located in the head of the pancreas. Size and site are responsible for the symptoms caused, although 22.8% were asymptomatic. Diagnosis was made postoperatively in all cases by histopathologic studies. No case of malignancy was reported in any STPC.

CONCLUSIONS

STPCs are rare and benign lesions commonly discovered incidentally during abdominal imaging. Surgical treatment is considered the appropriate therapy for large and symptomatic STPCs. The definitive diagnosis is established by histopathologic and immunohistochemical studies.

Clinical outcomes for 14 consecutive patients with solid pseudopapillary neoplasms who underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

INTRODUCTION

The postoperative results of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for solid pseudopapillary neoplasm of the pancreas (SPN), including the effects of spleen-preserving resection, are still to be elucidated.

METHODS

Of the 139 patients who underwent laparoscopic pancreatectomy for non-cancerous tumors, 14 consecutive patients (average age, 29.6 years; 1 man, 13 women) with solitary SPN who underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy between March 2004 and June 2015 were enrolled. The tumors had a mean diameter of 4.8 cm. Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy was performed in eight patients (spleen-preserving group), including two cases involving pancreatic tail preservation, and laparoscopic spleno-distal pancreatectomy was performed in six patients (standard resection group).

RESULTS

The median operating time was 317 min, and the median blood loss was 50 mL. Postoperatively, grade B pancreatic fistulas appeared in two patients (14.3%) but resolved with conservative treatment. No patients had postoperative complications, other than pancreatic fistulas, or required reoperation. The median postoperative hospital stay was 11 days, and the postoperative mortality was zero.None of the patients had positive surgical margins or lymph nodes with metastasis. The median follow-up period did not significantly differ between the two groups (20 vs 39 months, P = 0.1368). All of the patients are alive and free from recurrent tumors without major late-phase complications.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy might be a suitable treatment for patients with SPN. A spleen-preserving operation is preferable for younger patients with SPN, and this study demonstrated the non-inferiority of the procedure compared to spleno-distal pancreatectomy.

Preservation of splenic vessels during laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy via lateral approach

Introduction

Preserving splenic vessels during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (SPDP-LA) is feasible and avoids unnecessary splenectomy.

Aim

To present our outcomes for this unique technique.

Material and methods

Between January 1998 and January 2012, 6 patients who underwent SPDP-LA for benign or low malignancy tumors in the pancreatic tail were included. Clinical characteristics as well as perioperative data were retrospectively recorded.

Results

All procedures were successful, with an average operative time of 184 min (range: 88–277 min) and average blood loss of 401.7 ml (range: 10–900 ml). The mean hospital stay was 7 days. Pancreatic fistula occurred in 2 patients but was then cured by external drainage. There was no mortality. Follow-ups were available for all patients.

Conclusions

Our experience was characterized by a lack of conversions and by acceptable rates of postoperative fistula and morbidity. The lateral approach showed beneficial results in patients without complications and short post-operative hospital stays.

Minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: Does splenic vessel preservation have better postoperative outcomes? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) can be performed with either splenic vessel preservation (SVP) or resection [Warshaw procedure (WP)]. The aim of this study was to evaluate the postoperative clinical outcomes of patients undergoing both methods.

DATA SOURCES

Database search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and Google Scholar was performed (2000-2014); key bibliographies were reviewed. Qualified studies comparing patients undergoing SPDP with either SVP or WP, and assessing postoperative complications were included. Calculated pooled risk ratio (RR) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) by random effects methods were used in the meta-analyses.

RESULTS

The search yielded 215 studies, of which only 14 observational studies met our selection criteria. The studies included 943 patients in total; 652 (69%) underwent SVP and 291 (31%) underwent WP. Overall, there was a lower incidence of splenic infarction (RR=0.17; 95% CI: 0.09-0.33; P<0.001), gastric varices (RR=0.16; 95% CI: 0.05-0.51; P=0.002), and intra/postoperative splenectomy (RR=0.20; 95% CI: 0.08-0.49; P<0.001) in the SVP group. There was no difference in incidence of pancreatic fistula (WP vs SVP, 23.6% vs 22.9%; P=0.37), length of hospital stay, operative time or blood loss. There was moderate cross-study heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

SVP is a safe, efficient and feasible technique that may be used to preserve the spleen. WP may be more suitable for large tumors close to the splenic hilum or those associated with splenomegaly. Randomized clinical trials are justified to examine the long-term benefits of SVP-SPDP.

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: comparative study of spleen preservation with splenic vessel resection and splenic vessel preservation

BACKGROUND

Spleen-preserving laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (SPLDP) can be performed with splenic vessel resection (SVR) or splenic vessel preservation (SVP). The purpose of this comparative study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent SPLDP with SVR or SVP at a single institution.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of 246 patients who underwent SPLDP at Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea, for benign or low-grade malignant tumors found in the body or tail of the pancreas between November 2005 and November 2011.

RESULTS

In total, 206 patients (83.7 %) were managed by SVP. SVR was performed in the remaining 40 (16.3 %) cases. There were no significant differences between the SVP and SVR groups in terms of intraoperative blood loss (378 ± 240 vs. 328 ± 204 ml, respectively; P = 0.240) and operating time (193.4 ± 59.1 vs. 204.4 ± 51.8 min, respectively; P = 0.492). Sixty-seven (32.5 %) and 10 patients (25 %) had complications in the SVP and SVR groups, respectively (P = 0.347). At 3 days after surgery, the rates of splenic infarction were 16.0 % (33/206) in the SVP group and 52.5 % (21/40) in the SVR group, but all recovered within 12 months on postoperative computed tomography. The time of recovery from splenic infarction was 3.6 ± 3.1 and 4.7 ± 3.7 months in the SVP and SVR groups, respectively. At 6 months, the rates of gastric varices were 1.9 % in the SVP group and 35 % in the SVR group (P < 0.001) with no progression at 12 months. No gastrointestinal bleeding occurred at a median follow-up of 34 months (range = 12-84).

CONCLUSIONS

SPLDP with SVR can be used for patients with large and benign or low-grade malignant tumors that distort and compress vessel course, as the higher rate of early splenic ischemia and perigastric varices is acceptable.

Retrospective analysis of short term outcomes after spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy for sodid pseudopapillary tumours

Solid pseudopapillary pancreatic tumour (SPN) is a rare pancreatic tumour representing 0.1%-3% of all exocrine pancreatic tumours. Most SPN show benign and low-grade malignant behaviour; malignant degeneration is observed in 10-15% of the patients. More than 40% of SPN involve the tail of the pancreas leading to a minimal invasive distal pancreatectomy approach. In this report we present the case of a young 22 Caucasian woman suffering from SPN who successfully underwent laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy. Postoperative course was uneventful. A CT scan control at six months was negative for recurrences. We have also made an analysis of all the laparoscopic treatment of SPN reported in English literature.

Dual-incision laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy has been widely performed for benign and borderline malignancy in the body or tail of the pancreas when there are not oncologic indications for splenectomy. As the need for minimally invasive procedures to reduce postoperative morbidity and improve the quality of life is increasing, many surgeons have attempted to reduce the number of trocars and incision size to minimize access trauma and scarring. Single-port laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy is the result of these efforts; however it has many limitations such as technical difficulty and prolonged operation time. In this article, we report the first case of dual-incision laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy, proving that it can be a safe and feasible minimally invasive procedure for benign or borderline malignant tumors in the body or tail of the pancreas.

Splenic vessel preservation versus Warshaw's technique during spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: a meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Splenic preservation can be achieved through splenic vessel resection by Warshaw's technique (WT) or by preserving the splenic vessels. This meta-analysis aims to provide evidence-based comparison regarding the perioperative outcome and long-term benefits between patients with and without splenic vessel preservation (SVP) during spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy.

METHOD

A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate studies comparing splenic vessel preservation versus resection groups. Ten retrospective studies including 699 patients were eligible for an analysis of general, perioperative, and long-term outcomes. A further analysis composed of five subgroups was also conducted in terms of laparoscopic approach.

RESULTS

Warshaw's technique related to significant shorter operation time (P < 0.0001). There was no difference in blood loss (P = 0.45) as well as median tumor size (p = 0.1) between the two groups. The overall rate of complications indicated no difference between SVP and WT (P = 0.1), including pancreatic fistula rates, which were not statistically different among the treatment groups (P = 0.27). However, the occurrence of gastric varices and splenic infarction was significant higher in the WT group (P < 0.01). In laparoscopic subgroups, patients treated by WT had much lower blood loss (P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

In spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy, comparing with SVP, there is no evidence of significant benefit of WT. Nonetheless, surgeons should master both techniques and choose an appropriate one based on personal experience and a "case by case" situation. However, the current available evidence is weak, and further randomized controlled data are warranted.