Single-centre experience of laparoscopic pancreatic surgery

The impact of cirrhosis on short and long postoperative outcomes after distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

The impact of cirrhosis on the postoperative outcomes of distal pancreatectomy is yet to be reported. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of distal pancreatectomy in patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, multicentric study patients with cirrhosis who underwent planned distal pancreatectomy between 2008 and 2020 in French high volume centers. Patients with cirrhosis were matched 1:4 for demographic, surgical, and histologic criteria with patients without cirrhosis. The primary endpoint was severe morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III). The secondary endpoints were postoperative complications, specifically related to cirrhosis and pancreatic surgery, and survival for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

RESULTS

Overall, 32 patients with cirrhosis were matched with 128 patients without cirrhosis. Most patients (93.5%) had Child-Pugh A cirrhosis. The severe morbidity rate after distal pancreatectomy was higher in patients with cirrhosis than in those without cirrhosis (28.13% vs 25.75%, P = .11. The operative time was significantly longer in the cirrhotic group compared with controls (P = .01). However, patients with and without cirrhosis had comparable blood loss and conversion rates. Postoperatively, the two groups had similar rates of pancreatic fistula, hemorrhage, reoperation, postoperative mortality, and survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years.

CONCLUSION

The current study suggests that distal pancreatectomy in high-volume centers is feasible for patients with compensated cirrhosis.

Implementation and training with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: 23-year experience from a high-volume center

BACKGROUND

Distal pancreatectomy is the most common procedure in minimally-invasive pancreatic surgery. Data in the literature suggest that the learning curve flattens after performing up to 30 procedures. However, the exact number remains unclear.

METHODS

The implementation and training with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) in a high-volume center were studied between 1997 and 2020. Perioperative outcomes and factors related to conversion were assessed. The individual experiences of four different surgeons (pioneer and adopters) performing LDP on a regular basis were examined.

RESULTS

Six hundred forty LDPs were done accounting for 95% of all distal pancreatectomies performed throughout the study period. Conversion was needed in 14 (2.2%) patients due to intraoperative bleeding or tumor adherence to the major vasculature. Overall morbidity and mortality rates were 35 and 0.6%, respectively. Intra- and postoperative outcomes did not change for any of the surgeons within their first 40 cases. Operative time significantly decreased after the first 80 cases for the pioneer surgeon and did not change afterwards although the proportion of ductal adenocarcinoma increased. Tumor size increased after the first 80 cases for the first adopter without affecting the operative time.

CONCLUSIONS

In this nearly unselected cohort, no significant changes in surgical outcomes were observed throughout the first 40 LDPs for different surgeons. The exact number of procedures required to overcome the learning curve is difficult to determine as it seems to depend on patient selection policy and specifics of surgical training at the corresponding center.

Laparoscopic pancreatectomy for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors: outcomes in a single high-volume institution

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the perioperative and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic pancreatectomy for benign and low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors, and further compare the outcomes between different surgical techniques.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected clinical data of consecutive patients with benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors underwent surgery from February 2014 to February 2019. Patients were grouped and compared according to different surgical operations they accepted.

RESULTS

Totally 164 patients were reviewed and 83 patients underwent laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPPPD), 41 patients underwent laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) and 20 patients underwent laparoscopic central pancreatectomy (LCP) were included in this study, the rest 20 patients underwent laparoscopic enucleation were excluded. There were 53 male patients and 91 female patients. The median age of these patients was 53.0 years (IQR 39.3-63.0 years). The median BMI was 21.5 kg/m² (IQR 19.7-24.0 kg/m²). The postoperative severe complication was 4.2% and the 90-days mortality was 0. Compare with LCP group, the LPPPD and LSPDP group had longer operation time (300.4 ± 89.7 vs. 197.5 ± 30.5 min, P < 0.001) while LSPDP group had shorter operation time (174.8 ± 46.4 vs. 197.5 ± 30.5 min, P = 0.027), more blood loss [140.0 (50.0-1000.0) vs. 50.0 (20.0-200.0) ml P < 0.001 and 100.0 (20.0-300.0) vs. 50.0 (20.0-200.0 ml, P = 0.039, respectively), lower rate of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula [3 (3.6%) vs. 8 (40.0%), P < 0.001 and 3 (7.3%) vs. 8 (40.0%), P = 0.006, respectively], lower rate of postpancreatectomy hemorrhage [0 (0%) vs. 2 (10.0%), P = 0.036 and (0%) vs. 2 (10.0%) P = 0.104, respectively] and lower rate of postoperative severe complications [2 (2.4%) vs.4 (20.0%), P = 0.012 and 0 (0%) vs. 4 (20.0%), P = 0.009, respectively], higher proportion of postoperative pancreatin and insulin treatment (pancreatin: 39.8% vs., 15% P = 0.037 and 24.4%vs. 15%, P = 0.390; insulin: 0 vs. 18.1%, P = 0.040 and 0 vs. 12.2%, P = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, laparoscopic pancreatectomy could be safely performed for benign and low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors while the decision to perform laparoscopic central pancreatectomy should be made carefully for fit patients who can sustain a significant postoperative morbidity and could benefit from the excellent long-term results even in a high-volume center.

Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy Following Prior Upper Abdominal Surgery (Pancreatectomy and Prior Surgery)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Previous abdominal surgery can be a risk factor for perioperative complications in patients undergoing laparoscopic procedures. Today, distal pancreatectomy is increasingly performed laparoscopically. This study investigates the consequences of prior upper abdominal surgery (PUAS) for laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP).

METHODS

Patients who had undergone LDP from April 1997 to January 2020 were included. Based on the history and type of PUAS, these were categorized into three groups: minimally invasive (I), open (II), and no PUAS (III). To reduce possible confounding factors, the groups were matched in 1:2:4 fashion based on age, sex, body mass index (BMI) and American Society of Anesthesiology grade.

RESULTS

After matching, 30, 60, and 120 patients were included in the minimally invasive, open and no PUAS groups, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found in terms of intraoperative outcomes. Postoperative morbidity, mortality and length of hospital stay were similar. Open PUAS was associated with higher Comprehensive Complication Index (33.7 vs 20.9 vs 26.2, p = 0.03) and greater proportion of patients with ≥ 2 complications (16.7 vs 0 vs 6.7%, p = 0.02) compared with minimally invasive and no PUAS. Male sex, overweight (BMI 25-29.9 kg/m2), diagnosis of neuroendocrine neoplasia, and open PUAS were risk factors for severe morbidity in the univariable analysis. Only open PUAS was statistically significant in the multivariable model.

CONCLUSIONS

PUAS does not impair the feasibility and safety of LDP as its perioperative outcomes are largely comparable to those in patients without PUAS. However, open PUAS increases the burden and severity of postoperative complications.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in patients with poor physical status

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is advantageous over open surgery in the treatment of benign pancreatic lesions and low-grade malignancies. Yet the evidence on the relationship between comorbidities and the outcomes of LDP remains scarce.

METHODS

Patients who had undergone LDP for all indications between April 1997 and December 2019 were included. Preoperative physical status was defined according to the American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) criteria. Perioperative outcomes were compared between the patients with high (ASA III-IV) and low/moderate anesthetic risk (ASA I-II).

RESULTS

A total of 605 patients were eligible for analysis including 190 with ASA III-IV and 415 with ASA I-II. The former was associated with older age, male gender, preexisting medical conditions, greater total number of comorbidities and red blood cell transfusion. The rate of medical complications was significantly higher in high-risk patients. Multivariable analysis identified ASA III-IV and operative time as independent predictors for medical complications. Overall/severe morbidity, surgical complications and mortality rates were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Poor physical status defined as ASA grades III-IV predicts medical complications, but has a limited impact on surgical complications and severe morbidity of LDP. Thus, it should not be considered as a contraindication for LDP.

Does tumor size influence the outcome of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is a safe procedure, but its role in resection of large pancreatic lesions has been questioned.

METHODS

Patients who underwent LDP for pancreatic solitary tumors in 1997-2017 were included in this study. The patients were divided into three groups in accordance with tumor size: <3.5 cm (group I); from 3.5 cm to 7.0 cm (group II), and ≥7 cm (group III).

RESULTS

218, 146 and 58 patients were identified in the groups I, II and III. Median tumor size in the groups I, II and III was 20, 47 and 81.5 mm (p < 0.001). Nine procedures (2.1%) were converted including 1(0.5%), 5(3.4%) and 3(5.2%) in the groups I, II and III (p = 0.036). Median operative time was longer in the group III compared with the groups I and II - 195 vs 158 and 159 min (p = 0.005). Median blood loss did not differ. Regression analysis revealed correlation between tumor size and operative time (R = 0.103; P = 0.035) and no correlation between tumor size and blood loss (R = 0.075; P = 0.125). Hospital stay was 5 days, similar in all groups.Postoperative morbidity was similar - 38.5, 32 and 34% in the group I, II and III.

CONCLUSION

LDP can be safely performed laparoscopically with outcomes similar to those for smaller tumors.

The Miami International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the first evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) before and during the International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR) meeting in Miami (March 2019).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

MIPR has seen rapid development in the past decade. Promising outcomes have been reported by early adopters from high-volume centers. Subsequently, multicenter series as well as randomized controlled trials were reported; however, guidelines for clinical practice were lacking.

METHODS

The Scottisch Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used, incorporating these 4 items: systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to answer clinical questions, whenever possible in PICO style, the GRADE approach for assessment of the quality of evidence, the Delphi method for establishing consensus on the developed recommendations, and the AGREE-II instrument for the assessment of guideline quality and external validation. The current guidelines are cosponsored by the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery, Pancreas Club, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgery, the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, and the Society of Surgical Oncology.

RESULTS

After screening 16,069 titles, 694 studies were reviewed, and 291 were included. The final 28 recommendations covered 6 topics; laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy, central pancreatectomy, pancreatoduodenectomy, as well as patient selection, training, learning curve, and minimal annual center volume required to obtain optimal outcomes and patient safety.

CONCLUSION

The IG-MIPR using SIGN methodology give guidance to surgeons, hospital administrators, patients, and medical societies on the use and outcome of MIPR as well as the approach to be taken regarding this challenging type of surgery.

Variation in use of open and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and associated outcome metrics in a universal health care system

BACKGROUND

Universal health care (UHC) should ensure equal access to and use of surgery, but few studies have explored variation in UHC systems. The objective was to describe practice of distal pancreatectomy in Norway covered exclusively by an UHC.

METHODS

Data on all patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy from the Norwegian Patient Register over a 5-year period. Age- and gender-adjusted population-based resection rates (adj. per million/yr) for distal pancreatectomy were analysed across 4 regions and outcomes related to splenic salvage rate, hospital stay, reoperation, readmissions and 90-day mortality risk between regions. Risk is reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (c.i.).

RESULTS

Regional difference exist in terms of absolute numbers, with the majority of procedures done in one region (n = 331; 59.7%). Regional variation persisted for age- and gender-adjusted population-rates, with highest rate at 23.8/million/yr and lowest rate at 13.5/mill/yr (for a 176% relative difference; or an absolute difference of +10.3 resections/million/yr). Overall, a lapDP instead of an open DP was 3.5 times more likely in SouthEast compared to all other regions combined (lapDP rate: 83% vrs 24%, respectively; OR 15.4, 95% c.i. 10.1-23.5; P < 0.001). The splenic salvage rate was lower in SouthEast (19.9%) compared to all other regions (average 26.5%; highest in Central-region at 37.0%; P = 0.010 for trend). Controlled for other factors in multivariate regression, 'region' of surgery remained significantly associated with laparoscopic access.

CONCLUSION

Despite a universal health care system, considerable variation exists in resection rates, use of laparoscopy and splenic salvage rates across regions.

Trends in management and outcome of cystic pancreatic lesions - analysis of 322 cases undergoing surgical resection

Background: Several guidelines for the management of cystic pancreatic lesions (CPL) exists. From 2013, Oslo University Hospital adapted the European consensus guidelines (ECG) in the decision-making as to whether patients should be advised to have resection or observation for CPL. The aims of the study were to assess changes over time in the workup and diagnostic accuracy of resected CPL, and the short-term surgical outcome. Methods: Preoperative radiological workup, clinicopathological characteristics, and perioperative outcomes were retrospectively reviewed in three consecutive time periods (early: 2004-2008, intermediate: 2009-2012, late: 2013-2016). The rate of concordance between the ECG recommendations for resection (ECG+) or observation (ECG-) and the final histological diagnosis were assessed. Results: A total of 322 consecutive patients underwent resection for CPL (early: n = 89, intermediate: n = 108, late: n = 125). The most common diagnoses were intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia (IPMN, 36.0%), serous cystic neoplasm (SCN, 23.9%), mucinous cystic neoplasm (10.6%), pseudocyst (9.6%), solid pseudopapillary neoplasm (7.8%), and cystic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumour (5.3%). The proportion of ECG+ CPL undergoing surgery increased significantly (42.7% vs. 60.7% vs. 70.4%, p < .001). The relative proportion of patients undergoing resection for SCN decreased (38.2% vs. 21.3% vs. 16.0%), whereas it increased for IPMN (31.5% vs. 30.6% vs. 44.0%). The use of magnetic resonance imaging and endoscopic ultrasound increased. There were no differences in postoperative severe complications (23.0% vs. 23.6%) or 90-day mortality (2.3% vs. 0.8%) between ECG+ and ECG- patients. Conclusion: Several changes in the management of CPL were revealed during time. Adherence to guidelines is important in order to avoid unnecessary surgery for CPL.

A nationwide cohort study of resection rates and short-term outcomes in open and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Distal pancreatectomy (DP) is increasingly done by laparoscopy but data from routine practise are scarce. We describe practise in a national cohort.

METHODS

Data from the Norwegian Patient Register of all patients undergoing DP from 2012 to 2016. National resection rates were analysed. Short-term outcomes include length of stay, reoperation, readmissions and 90-day mortality. Risk is reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (c.i.).

RESULTS

Of 554 procedures, 327 (59%) were laparoscopic. Median age was 66 years (iqr 55-72) and 52% were women. Resection rates increased during the period for all DP (from 1.76 to 2.39 per 100.000/yr), and significantly for laparoscopic DP (adjusted R-square 0.858; P = 0.015). Elderly patients had more resection (r₂ = 0.11; P = 0.019). Splenectomy (n = 427; 77%) was less likely with laparoscopy (laparoscopy 72% vs open 84%, respectively; OR 0.64, 95% c.i. 0.42-0.97; P = 0.035). Multivisceral resections occurred more often in open DP (5.3% vs 1.2% for laparoscopy, OR 4.51, 1.44-14.2; P = 0.008). Reoperation occurred in 34 (6%), readmission in 109 (20%), and mortality in 8 (1.4%). Hospital stay was shorter for laparoscopic DP.

CONCLUSION

Use of DP increases in the population, particularly in the elderly, with use of laparoscopic access and an association with a reduced hospital stay.

Minimally invasive versus open pancreatic enucleation. Systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical outcomes

Parenchymal sparing procedures are gaining interest in pancreatic surgery and recent studies have reported that minimally invasive pancreatic enucleation may be associated with enhanced outcomes when compared with traditional surgery. By meta-analyzing the available data from the literature, minimally invasive surgery is not at higher risk of pancreatic fistula and offers a number of advantages over conventional surgery for pancreatic enucleation.

Incidence and management of arterial injuries during pancreatectomy

PURPOSE

The incidence of intraoperative arterial injury during pancreatectomy is not well described. This study aims to evaluate the incidence, management, and outcome of arterial injuries during pancreatectomy.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of 1535 consecutive patients undergoing pancreatectomy between 2006 and 2016 at Oslo University Hospital. The type of arterial injury and potential contributing factors were analyzed. Short-term outcomes were compared between patients with arterial injury and patients undergoing a planned arterial resection due to tumor involvement.

RESULTS

Arterial injury was diagnosed in 14 patients (incidence 0.91%), while planned arterial resection was performed in 22 patients. The injuries were located in the superior mesenteric artery (n = 5), right hepatic artery (n = 5), common hepatic artery (n = 2), left hepatic artery (n = 1), and celiac trunk (n = 2). The artery was reconstructed in all except one patient. In 11 patients with injury, peripancreatic inflammation, aberrant arterial anatomy, close relationship between tumor and injured artery, or a combination of the three were found. Median estimated blood loss was 1100 ml in both groups. Rate of severe complications (≥ Clavien grade IIIa), comprehensive complication index, and 90-day mortality for patients with intraoperative arterial injury vs planned arterial resection were 43 vs 45% (p = 0.879), median 35.9 vs 21.8 (p = 0.287), and 14.3 vs 4.5% (p = 0.551), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Arterial injury during pancreatectomy is an infrequent and manageable complication. Early recognition and primary repair in order to restore arterial liver perfusion may improve outcome. However, the morbidity is high and comparable to patients undergoing a planned arterial resection.

The Largest European Single-Center Experience: 300 Laparoscopic Pancreatic Resections

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic pancreatic resection (LPR) has become routine, large single-center series are still lacking. Our aim was to analyze the results of a large European single-center series of LPR.

STUDY DESIGN

Between January 2008 and September 2015, 300 LPRs were performed and studied prospectively, including 165 (55%) distal pancreatectomies, 68 (23%) pancreaticoduodenectomies (PDs), 30 (10%) enucleations, 35 (11%) central pancreatectomies, and 2 (1%) total pancreatectomies.

RESULTS

Mean age was 54 ± 15.4 years old (range 17 to 87 years), and most patients were women (58%). Laparoscopic pancreatic resection was performed for malignancy (46%), low potential malignant (44%), or benign (10%) diseases. The mean operative durations were 211 ± 102 minutes (range 30 to 540 minutes) for the entire population and 351 ± 59 minutes (range 240 to 540 minutes) for PD, and decreased with the learning curve. Mean blood loss was 229 ± 269 mL (range 0 to 1,500 mL), and 13 patients (4%) received transfusions. Conversion to an open procedure was required in 12 patients (4%), and only 5 in the last 250 patients (14% vs 2%; p < 0.001). Mortality occurred in 4 (1.3%) patients and only after PD (5.8%). Common complications were pancreatic fistula (n = 124, 41%), bleeding (n = 35, 12%), and reoperation (n = 28, 9%). The postoperative outcomes were less favorable in procedures with a reconstruction phase (n = 105) than in those without (n = 195), with increased mortality (3.8% vs 0%; p = 0.04), overall morbidity (76% vs % 52%; p < 0.001), and mean hospital stay (26 ± 15 days vs 16 ± 10 days; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic pancreatic resection without a reconstruction phase has excellent outcomes; LPR with a reconstruction phase, especially PD, has less favorable outcomes, and further randomized studies are required to draw conclusions on the safety and benefits of this approach.

Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy: Review of the English Literature

BACKGROUND

Recently, the superiority of the minimally invasive approach, which results in a better cosmetic result, faster recovery, and shorter length of hospital stay, is a technique that has been progressively recognized as it has developed. And the minimally invasive approach has been applied to distal pancreatectomy (DP), which is a standard method for the treatment of benign, borderline, and part of malignant lesions of the pancreatic body and tail. This article aims to analyze the types, postoperative recovery, and outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search of the scientific literature was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, online journals, and the Internet for all publications on LDP. Articles were selected if the abstract contained patients who underwent LDP for pancreatic diseases. All selected articles were reviewed and analyzed.

RESULTS

If there were no contraindications for LDP, this operation is suitable for benign, borderline, or malignant tumors of the pancreatic body and tail, which should try to be performed with preservation of the spleen. LDP is safe and feasible under some conditions to experienced surgeon. Single-incision laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (S-LDP) and robotic laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (R-LDP) perioperative outcomes are similar with conventional multi-incision laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (C-LDP). And the advantages of S-LDP and R-LDP require further exploration. With the application of enhanced recovery program (ERP), length of hospital stay and costs are reduced.

CONCLUSIONS

LDP is safe and feasible under some conditions. Compared with open distal pancreatectomy, LDP has a lot of advantages; a trend was observed for LDP to replace traditional open surgery. LDP combined with ERP is expected to become standard in the treatment of pancreatic body and tail lesions.

Perioperative outcomes and survival in elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

The outcomes following laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) in elderly patients have not been widely reported to date. This study aimed to analyze perioperative and oncologic outcomes in patients aged ≥70 years (elderly group) and compare with those <70 years (non-elderly group).

METHODS

From April 1997 to September 2015, 402 consecutive patients with lesions in the body and tail of the pancreas underwent LDP at Rikshospitalet, Oslo University Hospital.

RESULTS

Of these, 118 (29.4%) were elderly, whereas 284 (70.6%) were non-elderly. Despite higher rate of comorbidities and American Society of Anesthesiologists score (P = 0.001 and 0.001, respectively), elderly patients had lower postoperative morbidity, pancreatic fistula (PF) and readmission rates, compared with non-elderly (P = 0.032, 0.001 and 0.025, respectively). Spleen-preserving LDP (SPLDP) resulted in similar postoperative outcomes in the two groups. Elderly patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) were comparable to non-elderly in terms of median and 3-year survival (20.2 vs. 19 months (P = 0.94, log-rank) and 26.7% vs. 34.3%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Both LDP and SPLDP are safe in patients aged ≥70 years, providing outcomes similar to those in younger group. Elderly patients with PDAC can benefit from LDP, since age itself is not associated with decreased survival after surgery.

Role of laparoscopic enucleation in the treatment of pancreatic lesions: case series and case-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Previous studies report successful application of laparoscopic pancreatic enucleation (LPE). However, the evidence is limited to small series. This study aimed to evaluate the indications, technique and outcome of LPE at a tertiary care institution.

METHODS

Between February 1998 and April 2016, 45 consecutive LPEs were performed at Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet. Twenty-four (53.3 %) patients subjected to right-sided LPE (RLPE) were compared with 21 (46.7 %) patients who had undergone left-sided LPE (LLPE). A case-matched analysis (1:2) was performed to compare the outcomes following LLPE and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP).

RESULTS

Patient demographics, BMI, ASA score and pathological characteristics were similar between the RLPE and LLPE groups. Operative time was slightly longer for RLPE [123 (53-320) vs 102 (50-373) min, P = 0.09]. The rates of severe morbidity (≥Accordion grade III) and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (grades B/C) were comparable, although with a trend for higher rate of complications following LLPE (16.7 vs 33.3 %; P = 0.19 and 20.8 vs 33.3 %, P = 0.34, respectively). The hospital stay was similar between RLPE and LLPE [5 (2-80) vs 7 (2-52), P = 0.49]. A case-matched analysis demonstrated shorter operating time [145 (90-350) vs 103 (50-233) min, P = 0.02], but higher readmission rate following LLPE (25 vs 3.1 %, P = 0.037).

CONCLUSION

LLPE seems to be associated with a higher risk of postoperative morbidity and readmission rates than LDP. RLPE is a feasible, safe approach and a reasonable alternative to pancreatoduodenectomy in selected patients with pancreatic lesions.

Development of Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery: an Evidence-Based Systematic Review of Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Approaches

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic and robotic surgery of the pancreas has only recently emerged as viable treatment options for benign and malignant disease. This review seeks to evaluate the current body of evidence on these approaches to pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy.

METHODS

A systematic review of large published series was performed utilizing the PubMed search engine.

RESULTS

Based on these reports, both the laparoscopic and robotic techniques for these complex procedures appear to be safe and effective, if performed by high volume experienced pancreatic surgeons. The advantages of each approach are highlighted, emphasizing the data available on the learning curve and potential dissemination.

CONCLUSIONS

Both minimally invasive approaches to pancreatic resection are safe and feasible.

Impact of obesity on surgical outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: A Norwegian single-center study

BACKGROUND

Obesity is known as a risk factor for intra- and postoperative complications in pancreatic operation. However, the operative outcomes in obese patients undergoing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy remain unclear.

METHODS

A total number of 423 patients underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy at Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet from April 1997 to December 2015. Patients were categorized into 3 groups based on the body mass index: normal weight (18.5-24.9 kg/m²), overweight (25-29.9 kg/m²), and obese (≥30 kg/m²). After excluding underweight patients, 402 patients were enrolled in this study.

RESULTS

Obese patients had significantly longer operative time and increased blood loss compared with overweight and normal weight patients (190 [61-480] minutes vs 158 [56-520] minutes vs 153 [29-374] minutes, P = .009 and 200 [0-2,800] mL vs 50 [0-6250] mL vs 90 [0-2,000] mL, P = .01, respectively). A multiple linear regression analysis identified obesity as predictive of prolonged operative time and increased blood loss during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. The rates of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula and severe complications (≥grade III by Accordion classification) were comparable in the 3 groups (P = .23 and P = .37, respectively). A multivariate logistic regression model did not demonstrate an association between obesity and postoperative morbidity (P = .09). The duration of hospital stay was comparable in the 3 groups (P = .13).

CONCLUSION

In spite of longer operative time and greater blood loss, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in obese patients is associated with satisfactory postoperative outcomes, similar to those in normal weight and overweight patients. Hence, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy should be equally considered both in obese and nonobese patients.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: results of a multicenter cohort study on 196 patients

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy is widely accepted as a feasible option for distal pancreatectomy. However, the experience in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is limited to a small number of studies, reported by expert centers. The present study aimed to evaluate perioperative and oncological outcomes after LDP for PDAC in a large, multicenter cohort of patients.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the data on 196 patients with histologically verified PDAC, operated at Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet (Oslo, Norway), Asan Medical Center (Seoul, Republic of Korea), Institut Mutualiste Montsouris (Paris, France) and University Hospital Southampton (Southampton, UK) between January 2002 and April 2015 was conducted. The patients with standard (SLDP) and extended (i.e., en bloc with adjacent organ, ELDP) resections were compared in terms of perioperative and oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

Out of 196 LDP procedures, 191 (97.4 %) were completed through laparoscopy, while five (2.6 %) were converted to open surgery. ELDP was performed in 30 (15.7 %) cases. Sixty-one (31.9 %) patients experienced postoperative complications, including 48 (25.1 %) with pancreatic fistula. The rate of clinically relevant fistula (grade B/C) was 15.7 %. Median postoperative hospital stay was 8 (2-63) days. Median follow-up was 16 months. Median survival was 31.3 months (95 % CI 22.9-39.6). Three- and 5-year actuarial survival rates were 42.4 and 30 %, respectively. SLDP was associated with significantly higher survival compared with ELDP (p = 0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

LDP seems to be a feasible and safe procedure, providing satisfactory oncological outcomes in patients with PDAC.

Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Resection: Is It Really the Future?

The introduction and widespread application of minimally invasive surgery has been one of the most important innovations that radically changed the practice of surgery during the last few decades. The application to pancreatic surgery of minimally invasive approach has only recently emerged: both laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) and laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) can be competently performed. LDP and LPD are advocated to improved perioperative outcomes, including decreased blood loss, shorter length of stay, reduced postoperative pain and expedited time to functional recovery. However, the indication to minimally invasive approach for pancreatic surgery is often benign or low-grade malignant pathologies. In this review, we summarize the current data on minimally invasive pancreatic surgery, focusing on indication, perioperative and oncological outcomes.

Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Tumors: Does Size Matter?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) for large pancreatic tumors may require prolonged dissection, and this could be associated with increased operative time and intraoperative complications.

METHODS

From a total cohort of 190 consecutive patients undergoing LDP, 18 patients were found to have pancreatic tumors >5 cm and were included in the retrospective study of prospectively collected data. Three techniques were used to approach the splenic vessels: the superior pancreatic, the inferior supracolic and post-pancreatic transection.

RESULTS

Of these 18 patients, 13 were women and 5 were men, the median age was 68 years and their median tumor size 7 cm. Exocrine pancreatic malignancy was diagnosed in 8 patients, 6 patients had neuroendocrine pancreatic tumors and 4 patients cystic neoplasm. The median number of resected nodes was 14. R1 resections for exocrine pancreatic malignancies were found in 50% of patients. Morbidity (grade >II) was found in 16.6% of patients and 30 days mortality in 1 patient. Overall median survival was 50 months and 29 months for patients with exocrine pancreatic malignancies.

CONCLUSIONS

LDP for large tumors, while technically demanding, is possible without additional morbidity and did not compromise short- and long-term oncological outcomes.

Laparoscopic surgery for solid pseudopapillary tumor of the pancreas

Background and Objectives:

Solid pseudopapillary tumors of the pancreas are rare and occur most frequently in young women. They have an uncertain pathogenesis and unclear clinical behavior. Our aim was to evaluate the clinical presentation of solid pseudopapillary tumors and assess the efficacy of treatment with minimally invasive surgery.

Methods:

From March 1997 to February 2011, 13 of 273 patients who underwent laparoscopic procedures on the pancreas were found to have solid pseudopapillary tumors. There were 12 female patients and 1 male patient. The median age was 21 years (range, 15–77 years). Abdominal pain was the most common presenting symptom (n = 9). Tumors were incidentally found in 3 patients on computed tomography scans obtained for other reasons.

Results:

Enucleation of the tumor was performed in 4 patients, including 3 in whom the tumor was located in the head of the pancreas. Eight patients underwent distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy, whereas spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy was performed in one case. The median tumor size was 6 cm (range, 1.5–11 cm), the median operative time was 197 minutes (range, 68–320 minutes), and the median blood loss was 50 mL (range, <50–750 mL). Distal resections were performed with a linear stapler. Four patients had postoperative complications. The median length of hospital stay was 5 days (range, 2–12 days). During a median follow-up period of 11 months (range, 3–121 months), no local recurrences or distant metastases were found.

Conclusion:

Laparoscopic resections and enucleations of solid pseudopapillary tumors of the pancreas can be performed safely and with adequate resection margins even if the tumors are located in the head of the organ.

Laparoscopic versus open enucleation for pancreatic neoplasms: clinical outcomes and pancreatic function analysis

BACKGROUND

The studies comparing laparoscopic enucleation (LE) with open enucleation (OE) are limited. This study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing LE and OE and to assess the pancreatic function after LE.

METHODS

Between February 2001 and July 2014, patients who underwent enucleation were reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups as LE and OE. Data considered for comparison analysis were patient demographics, intraoperative variables, morbidity, postoperative hospital stay, mortality, pathologic findings, and long-term follow-up (including pancreatic function).

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients (15 LE and 22 OE) were included in the final analysis. Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups. LE group showed significantly shorter operating time (118.2 ± 33.1 vs. 155.2 ± 44.3 min, p = 0.009), lower estimated blood loss (80.0 ± 71.2 vs. 195.5 ± 103.4 ml, p = 0.001), shorter first flatus time (1.8 ± 1.0 vs. 3.4 ± 1.8 days, p = 0.004), shorter diet start time (2.4 ± 1.0 vs. 4.4 ± 2.0 days, p = 0.001), shorter postoperative hospital stay (7.9 ± 3.4 vs. 11.2 ± 5.7 days, p = 0.046). Postoperative outcomes, including morbidity (40.0 vs. 45.5 %, p = 1.000), grade B/C pancreatic fistula rates (20.0 vs. 13.6 %, p = 0.874), and mortality, were similar in the two groups. The median follow-up period was 47 months (range 7-163 months). No local recurrence or distant metastasis was detected in either group. Only one patient (4.8 %) underwent OE developed new-onset diabetes, in comparison with none in the LE group. One patient (7.1 %) had weight loss and received pancreatic enzyme supplementation in the LE group, in comparison with two patients (9.5 %) in the OE group.

CONCLUSIONS

LE is a safe and feasible technique for the benign or low malignant-potential pancreatic neoplasms. Compared to OE, LE had shorter operating time, lower estimated blood loss, and faster recovery. LE could preserve the pancreatic function as the OE.

Laparoscopic middle pancreatectomy: how do I do it?

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic surgery is now extensively used, laparoscopic middle pancreatectomy (LMP) has rarely been described.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A 45-year-old woman was diagnosed with branch duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia (IPMN) at the pancreatic neck, which was discovered after numerous attacks of acute pancreatitis. LMP was decided on for treatment.

RESULTS

The patient underwent pure LMP with right to left dissection and one-layer pancreatogastric anastomosis. Surgery lasted 160 minutes, with 20 mL of blood loss. A frozen section showed negative margins on both sides. The postoperative course was uneventful with 15 days in the hospital. Histology confirmed the diagnosis of branch duct IPMN with moderate dysplasia and negative margins. The patient is symptom free 6 months after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results and the data in the literature suggest that the laparoscopic approach is indicated for middle pancreatectomy because there are no technical or oncological contraindications and the outcome is similar to that with the open approach.

Distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic carcinoma in the era of multimodal treatment

BACKGROUND

Recent publications have suggested improvements in the outcome of distal pancreatectomy (DP) for cancer, but the series were small and heterogeneous. The aim of the present study was to assess perioperative and long-term outcomes of DP for pancreatic adenocarcinoma in the era of multimodal treatment in a major European country.

METHODS

This was a nationwide study of all patients undergoing DP for pancreatic adenocarcinoma between 2004 and 2009 in 28 centres in France. Postoperative and long-term outcomes were assessed retrospectively and outcome predictors were explored by multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 278 patients were enrolled. Multivisceral resections were performed in 58 patients (20·9 per cent), venous resections in 33 (11·9 per cent) and arterial resections in 11 (4·0 per cent). Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was used in 20 patients. Postoperative complications occurred in 96 patients (34·5 per cent) and pancreatic fistulas developed in 76 (27·3 per cent). The postoperative 90-day mortality rate was 5·0 per cent. In univariable analysis, multivisceral resection was the only factor associated with postoperative morbidity (P = 0·048). Age 65 years or less, body mass index of at least 30 kg/m(2) and absence of preoperative chemoradiotherapy were associated with an increased risk of pancreatic fistula in multivariable analysis. Overall survival rates at 3 and 5 years were 44·9 and 29·5 per cent respectively. In multivariable analysis, only the presence of lymph node metastases was associated with poorer overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative morbidity and mortality associated with pancreatic fistula remain considerable after DP, but both short- and long-term survival have improved markedly.

Strategies to reduce pancreatic stump complications after open or laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

Fibrin sealants could potentially protect against the occurrence of pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy (DP). Fourteen relevant clinical studies (11 open and 3 laparoscopic DP) were identified using an extensive customized literature search, including 4 randomized controlled trials. Data from the 1 prospective randomized controlled trial with reasonable patient numbers found that fibrin reinforcement of the pancreatic stump suture line in open DP was associated with a significant reduction in fistula rate compared with suturing alone. Three other studies failed to show a significant difference in fistula rate. Two small scale nonrandomized retrospective studies each reported a reduced fistula rate associated with use of fibrin sealant in laparoscopic DP. On the basis of the current studies to evaluate the use of fibrin sealants in open and laparoscopic DP, application of fibrin glue to the pancreatic stump could help to reduce the incidence of troublesome pancreatic fistulas associated with this procedure.

Transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: preliminary experience and comparison to conventional multi-port laparoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS), which has been demonstrated to be safely applied on kinds of surgeries, may represent an improvement over conventional multi-port laparoscopic surgery. However, there are still few clinical experiences of SILS in pancreatic surgery until now. In this study, we will summarize our experience of transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (TUSI-LDP), and compare its related parameters with conventional multi-port laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (C-LDP).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted for the patients who underwent C-LDP or TUSI-LDP in our department. The demographic data, operative parameters, and postoperative complications in the two groups were summarized and compared.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was performed in a total of 21 cases, among which TUSI-LDP was performed in 14 cases. As far as the demographical results concerned, there were no significant differences between the two groups. The conversion to open surgery was conducted in one case in the TUSI-LDP group because of severe adhesion between pancreatic cyst and surrounding tissues, while in the C-LDP group the only one conversion was for the difficult detection of small lesion. The mean operating time and intraoperative blood loss in TUSI-LDP group was a little shorter (166.4 ± 57.4 versus 202.1 ± 122.5 minutes, p > 0.05, and 157.1 ± 162.4 versus 168.6 ± 157.4 ml, p > 0.05). The postoperative pain and post-operation lengths of hospital stay in the TUSI-LDP group were also less, though there was no significant statistical difference between the two groups. For the post-operation complications, in TUSI-LDP group the pancreatic leakage occurred in only one case, and ceased spontaneously with only a drain for 61 days. There were no other complications including postoperative hemorrhage, venous thrombosis, infections and so on in both groups.

CONCLUSION

For the experienced laparoscopic surgeons, in selected patients, TUSI-LDP is a feasible technique, with excellent cosmetic effect, less postoperative pain and post-operation lengths of hospital stay. With the experience accumulated, the operating time and intraoperative blood loss of TUSI-LDP could also gradually reduce.

Pancreatic cancer-improved care achievable

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is one of the most aggressive cancers, and the decline in mortality observed in most other cancer diseases, has so far not taken place in pancreatic cancer. Complete tumor resection is a requirement for potential cure, and the reorganization of care in the direction of high patient-volume centers, offering multimodal treatment, has improved survival and Quality of Life. Also the rates and severity grade of complications are improving in high-volume pancreatic centers. One of the major problems worldwide is underutilization of surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer. Suboptimal investigation, follow up and oncological treatment outside specialized centers are additional key problems. New chemotherapeutic regimens like FOLFIRINOX have improved survival in patients with metastatic disease, and different adjuvant treatment options result in well documented survival benefit. Neoadjuvant treatment is highly relevant, but needs further evaluation. Also adjuvant immunotherapy, in the form of vaccination with synthetic K-Ras-peptides, has been shown to produce long term immunological memory in cytotoxic T-cells in long term survivors. Improvement in clinical outcome is already achievable and further progress is expected in the near future for patients treated with curative as well as palliative intention.

Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a single-institution case-control study

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is becoming increasingly established at specialized surgical institutions worldwide. The purpose of this study was to compare single-incision laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (panLESS) with conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (panLAP) to assess feasibility and 30-day morbidity.

METHODS

Eight consecutive patients who underwent panLESS were matched with patients who underwent panLAP in the same time period. Matching criteria were age, body mass index, and American Society of Anesthesiologists score. Feasibility was based on tumor size, operative time, intraoperative bleeding, resection status, and hospital stay. Thirty-day morbidity was defined by the revised Accordion Classification system and the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula definition.

RESULTS

Over a 19-month period, 8 and 16 patients were identified for panLESS and panLAP, respectively. There were no significant differences in tumor size, operative time, intraoperative bleeding, resection status, and hospital stay between the two groups. Surgical complications developed in four panLESS patients and five panLAP patients, and out of which, two patients from each group developed a postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B).

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that panLESS is comparable to panLAP in terms of feasibility. More experience is needed to define what role single-incision distal pancreatectomy should have in minimal invasive pancreatic surgery.

Laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing pancreatectomy

In recent years laparoscopic pancreatic procedures have developed rapidly, and reports of laparoscopic resection including laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy have increased in number. On the other hand, many benign and low-grade malignant pancreatic lesions have recently been detected by the improved diagnostic modalities. Parenchyma-sparing pancreatectomy is a preferred surgical procedure for such benign and low-malignancy pancreatic lesions, because parenchyma-sparing pancreatectomy can avoid the unnecessary resection of the normal pancreatic parenchyma, thereby preserving the endocrine and exocrine functions of the pancreas. Simultaneously, laparoscopic surgery has contributed to minimally invasive approaches for various pancreatic surgical procedures. The combination of laparoscopic surgery and parenchyma-sparing pancreatectomy is an ideal surgical procedure for benign and low-grade malignant pancreatic lesions. For laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing pancreatectomy to become more widely known and its indications clarified, it is necessary to demonstrate the clinical benefits, technical feasibility, and safety of this complex and difficult surgical procedure.

Long-term outcome of laparoscopic surgery for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

BACKGROUND

As most pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNET) are relatively small and solitary, they may be considered well suited for removal by a minimally invasive approach. There are few large series that describe laparoscopic surgery for PNET. The primary aim of this study was to describe the feasibility, outcome, and histopathology associated with laparoscopic pancreatic surgery (LS) of PNET in a large series.

METHODS

All patients with PNET who underwent LS at a single hospital from March 1997 to April 2011 were included retrospectively in the study.

RESULTS

A total of 72 patients with PNET underwent 75 laparoscopic procedures, out of which 65 were laparoscopic resections or enucleations. The median operative time of all patients who underwent resections or enucleations was 175 (60-520) min, the median blood loss was 300 (5-2700) ml, and the median length of hospital stay was 7 (2-27) days. The overall morbidity rate was 42%, with a surgical morbidity rate of 21% and postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) formation in 21%. Laparoscopic enucleations were associated with a higher rate of POPF than were laparoscopic resections. Five-year disease-specific survival rate was 90%. The T stage, R stage, and a Ki-67 cutoff value of 5% significantly predicted 5-year survival.

CONCLUSION

LS of PNET is feasible with acceptable morbidity and a good overall disease-specific long-term prognosis.

Laparoscopic and robotic resection for pancreatic cancer

Minimally invasive surgical approaches for pancreatic resection have been established as feasible and safe. Whereas widespread application of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is in progress, the utilization of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy is still localized to a few centers because of the added complexity and advanced laparoscopic skills required. Comparative studies have demonstrated the typical advantages of minimally invasive approaches for pancreatic resection, namely, less blood loss and shorter hospital stay. Robotic assistance for laparoscopic approaches is gaining interest, but the true value added is still undefined. Significant discussion revolves around the appropriateness of minimally invasive approaches in pancreatic cancer. Although limited data and only short-term follow-up engender ongoing skepticism, the technical feasibility, existing reports in pancreatic cancer, and the lack of negative outcomes in other gastrointestinal cancers spark ongoing clinical evaluation. Minimally invasive surgical approaches have significant potential to improve the outcomes of pancreatic resection especially in pancreatic cancer patients in whom an optimal recovery is important for adjuvant treatment options. Larger experiences are forthcoming, and controlled trials are eagerly awaited; however, the feasibility of such is questionable because of the low incidence of resectable pancreatic cancer and the small number of centers performing minimally invasive pancreatectomy for malignancy.

Laparoscopic minor pancreatic resections (enucleations/atypical resections). A long-term appraisal of a supposed mini-invasive approach

INTRODUCTION

A few retrospective, small, often multicentric studies show encouraging results of laparoscopic minor pancreatic surgery, but do not allow for an evaluation of feasibility and effectiveness.

AIM

Evaluation of the results of laparoscopic minor pancreatic resections (LMPR), including atypical resections and enucleations.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The outcome of all consecutive patients undergoing LMPR in a tertiary care university hospital specializing in the laparoscopic approach to solid organs (I.M.M., Paris - France) was retrospectively evaluated by the analysis of operating time, blood loss, conversion, morbidity, stay and late outcome.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients underwent LMPR (29 enucleations and 4 atypical resections) for various diseases. The conversion rate was 21%, mean operating time 189 min, and mean blood loss 133 ml. Morbidity was 60%; 10 patients (30%) presented a pancreatic fistula. Pancreatic fistula was independent of type of resection, technique of pancreas section, management of enucleated surface and somatostatin administration. Median stay for enucleations was 18 days. Mean follow-up was 61 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic pancreatic enucleation is feasible and safe, with no mortality, no lengthening of operating time and a high success rate. Conversely, it does not imply a reduction in complications or hospital stay at the present state of the art.

Surgical treatment of sporadic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a state of the art review

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) are rare neoplasms. They are clinically diverse and divided into functioning and nonfunctioning disease, depending on their ability to produce symptoms due to hormone production. Surgical resection is the only curative treatment and remains the cornerstone therapy for this patient group, even in patients with advanced disease. Over the last decade there has been a noticeable trend towards more aggressive surgery as well as more minimally invasive surgery in patients with PNETs. This has resulted in improved long-term survival in patients with locally advanced and metastatic disease treated aggressively, as well as shorter hospital stays and comparable long-term outcomes in patients with limited disease treated minimally invasively. There are still controversies related to issues of surgical treatment of PNETs, such as to what extent enucleation, lymph node sampling, and vascular reconstruction are beneficial for the oncologic outcome. Histopathologic tumor classification is of high clinical importance for treatment planning and prognostic evaluation of patients with PNETs. A constant challenge, which relates to the treatment of PNETs, is the lack of an internationally accepted histopathological classification system. This paper reviews current issues on the surgical treatment of sporadic PNETs with specific focus on surgical approaches and tumor classification.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: Up-to-date and literature review

Pancreatic surgery represents one of the most challenging areas in digestive surgery. In recent years, an increasing number of laparoscopic pancreatic procedures have been performed and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has gained world-wide acceptance because it does not require anastomosis or other reconstruction. To date, English literature reports more than 300 papers focusing on LDP, but only 6% included more than 30 patients. Literature review confirms that LDP is a feasible and safe procedure in patients with benign or low grade malignancies. Decreased blood loss and morbidity, early recovery and shorter hospital stay may be the main advantages. Several concerns still exist for laparoscopic pancreatic adenocarcinoma excision. The individual surgeon determines the technical conduction of LDP, with or without spleen preservation; currently robotic pancreatic surgery has gained diffusion. Additional researches are necessary to determine the best technique to improve the procedure results.

Hemostatic Agents in Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery: A Review of the Literature and Critical Evaluation of a Novel Carrier-Bound Fibrin Sealant (TachoSil)

Background. Despite progress in surgical techniques applied during hepatobiliary and pancreas (HPB) surgery, bleeding and bile leak remain significant contributors to postoperative mortality and morbidity. Topical hemostatics have been developed and utilized across surgical specialties, but data regarding effectiveness remains inconsistent and sparse in HPB surgery. Methods. A comprehensive search for studies and reviews on hemostatics in HPB surgery was performed via an October 2011 query of Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. In-depth evaluation of a novel carrier-bound fibrin sealant (TachoSil) was also performed. Results. The literature review illustrates multiple attempts have been made at developing different topical hemostatics and sealants to aid in surgical procedures. In HPB surgery, efforts have been directed at decreasing bleeding, biliary leakage, and pancreatic fistula. Conflicting scientific evidence exists regarding the effectiveness of these agents. Critical evaluation of the literature demonstrates TachoSil is a valuable tool in achieving hemostasis, and possibly biliostasis and pancreatic fistula prevention. Conclusion. While progress has been made in topical hemostatics for HPB surgery, an ideal agent has not yet been identified. TachoSil is promising, but larger randomized, controlled clinical trials are required to more fully evaluate its efficacy in reducing bleeding, biliary leakage, and pancreatic fistulas in HPB surgery.

Hemostatic Agents in Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery: A Review of the Literature and Critical Evaluation of a Novel Carrier-Bound Fibrin Sealant (TachoSil)

Background. Despite progress in surgical techniques applied during hepatobiliary and pancreas (HPB) surgery, bleeding and bile leak remain significant contributors to postoperative mortality and morbidity. Topical hemostatics have been developed and utilized across surgical specialties, but data regarding effectiveness remains inconsistent and sparse in HPB surgery. Methods. A comprehensive search for studies and reviews on hemostatics in HPB surgery was performed via an October 2011 query of Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. In-depth evaluation of a novel carrier-bound fibrin sealant (TachoSil) was also performed. Results. The literature review illustrates multiple attempts have been made at developing different topical hemostatics and sealants to aid in surgical procedures. In HPB surgery, efforts have been directed at decreasing bleeding, biliary leakage, and pancreatic fistula. Conflicting scientific evidence exists regarding the effectiveness of these agents. Critical evaluation of the literature demonstrates TachoSil is a valuable tool in achieving hemostasis, and possibly biliostasis and pancreatic fistula prevention. Conclusion. While progress has been made in topical hemostatics for HPB surgery, an ideal agent has not yet been identified. TachoSil is promising, but larger randomized, controlled clinical trials are required to more fully evaluate its efficacy in reducing bleeding, biliary leakage, and pancreatic fistulas in HPB surgery.

Serous cyst adenoma of the pancreas: appraisal of active surgical strategy before it causes problems

BACKGROUND

Patients who are diagnosed with symptomatic or ambiguous serous cyst adenoma (SCA) need surgery. The purpose of this study is to suggest a potential management plan based on analysis of surgically treated SCAs.

METHODS

Between August 1995 and December 2010, 38 patients with SCA were surgically treated. Data were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Among 38 patients, 28 were female and ten were male. Mean age was 49.6 ± 14.1 years, and five patients (13.2%) were older than 65 years. Among the five patients, two were more than 70 years old. Seventeen patients (44.7%) were symptomatic, and the rest (21, 55.3%) were incidentally found to have SCA. Twenty-seven patients underwent open pancreatectomy, and 11 patients received laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. Mean tumor size was 4.4 ± 2.8 cm. Most asymptomatic patients of SCA had a left-sided pancreatic tumor and distal pancreatectomy with or without splenectomy were frequently performed with short operative time and less blood transfusion (P < 0.05). Minimally invasive surgery was mostly applied to left-sided tumors less than 5 cm in size (11/19 vs. 0/6, P = 0.029). Combined resection of the right colon was performed in two patients (5.3%) due to severe adhesion associated with large tumors. Significant association was noted between age and tumor size in asymptomatic patients (correlation coefficient = 0.541, R (2) = 0.293, P = 0.014). Postoperative pancreatic fistula was observed in five patients (13.2%, grade B) but could be managed conservatively. No mortality was found.

CONCLUSION

Before SCA causes symptoms or grows larger than 5 cm, an active surgical approach, such as minimally invasive surgery, needs to be considered.

Laparoscopic resection of exocrine carcinoma in central and distal pancreas results in a high rate of radical resections and long postoperative survival

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopic resection in patients with pancreatic cancer remains to be clarified, because previous reports have not clearly defined oncologic outcomes. The objective of the present study was to investigate this question with the rate of R0 resection and long-term survival as endpoints.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study included prospectively collected data from 40 patients operated laparoscopically with curative intent for exocrine pancreatic malignancies identified among 250 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic pancreatic operations since 1997. All 40 patients had histologically verified exocrine pancreatic carcinoma.

RESULTS

Ten patients (25%) with typical ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were deemed nonresectable by laparoscopic staging. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was performed in 29 patients; 8 resections were combined with resections of adjacent organs and 1 removal of a malignant intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm what appeared to be ectopic pancreatic tissue. In 1 patient, the resection was completed by hand-assisted technique, and 1 procedure was converted to open resection. Postoperative morbidity was 23% (n = 7). The median hospital stay was 5 days (range, 1-30). The rate of R0 resections was 93%. Postoperative 3-year survivals rates were 36% for the entire cohort (n = 30) and 30% in typical ductal adenocarcinoma (n = 21).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for exocrine pancreatic carcinoma is comparable with outcomes after open surgery and supports the concept that laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is a safe, oncologic procedure.