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

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for sporadic benign insulinoma: Short- and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery is the optimal treatment for insulinoma. The present study aimed to compare short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic surgery for sporadic benign insulinoma.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic surgery for insulinoma at our center between September 2007 and December 2019 was conducted. The demographic, perioperative and postoperative follow-up results were compared between the laparoscopic and robotic groups.

RESULTS

A total of 85 patients were enrolled, including 36 with laparoscopic approach and 49 with robotic approach. Enucleation was the preferred surgical procedure. Fifty-nine patients (69.4%) underwent enucleation; among them, 26 and 33 patients underwent laparoscopic and robotic surgery, respectively. Robotic enucleation had a lower conversion rate to laparotomy (0 vs. 19.2%, P = 0.013), shorter operative time (102.0 vs. 145.5 min, P = 0.008) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (6.0 vs. 8.5 d, P = 0.002) than laparoscopic enucleation. There were no differences between the groups in terms of intraoperative blood loss, the rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula and complications. After a median follow-up of 65 months, two patients in the laparoscopic group developed a functional recurrence and none of the patients in the robotic group had a recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic enucleation can reduce the conversion rate to laparotomy and shorten operative time, which might lead to a reduction in postoperative hospital stay.

Minimally invasive enucleation versus open enucleation for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic neoplasms: Effects on clinical outcomes and quality of life

Introduction

The efficacy and safety of minimally invasive pancreatic enucleation (PE) have rarely been investigated. This study aimed to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive enucleation (MIEn) with those of open enucleation (OEn) for benign/low-grade malignant pancreatic neoplasms.

Patients and Methods

Data collected from patients who underwent PE between January 2011 and June 2020 at our centre were analysed.

Results

Forty-two patients who underwent MIEn (10 - robot-assisted and 32 - laparoscopic) and 47 who underwent OEn were included in this study. Compared with the OEn group, the MIEn group showed shorter operation time (147.6 ± 71.3 min vs. 183.1 ± 64.3 min), shorter post-operative hospital stay (11.5 ± 3.9 days vs. 13.4 ± 4.2 days), shorter off-bed activity time (2.9 ± 0.9 days vs. 3.7 ± 1.0 days) and lower estimated blood loss (EBL) (118.5 ± 59.2 mL vs. 153.1 ± 85.0 mL). Overall complication rate (47.6% vs. 55.3%), overall post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rate (40.5% vs. 44.7%) and Grade B + C POPF rate (11.9% vs. 19.1%) were similar in both the groups. For neoplasms located in the proximal pancreas, MIEn showed more favourable perioperative outcomes than OEn. Unlike MIEn for superficial neoplasms, MIEn for neoplasms deeply embedded in the pancreas resulted in a longer operative time and tended to increase EBL and the incidence of complications and POPF. During the follow-up period, no significant differences were observed between these two groups in terms of pancreatic function or quality of life.

Conclusions

Compared to OEn, MIEn is effective and safe for patients with benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic neoplasms. However, MIEn for embedded pancreatic neoplasms is recommended only in experienced centres because of the high rates of complications and POPF.

[Enucleation of pancreatic tumors: a multiple-center study]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the immediate results of enucleation of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The results of enucleation of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) were analyzed in 95 patients between 2016 and 2021. Functioning tumors (mean size 16.8 mm) were found in 70 patients, non-functioning (mean size 25 mm) - in 25 patients. Intraparenchymal tumors were found in 48 people, extraorganic lesion - in 47 patients.

RESULTS

There were 262 patients with pNETs who underwent various surgeries between 2016 and 2021. Various resections were performed in 167 (63.8%) cases, enucleations - in 95 (36.2%) patients. Traditional surgical approach was used in 65 patients. Pancreatic fistula occurred in 21 patients (type B - 17, type C - 4), while arrosive bleeding occurred in 6 patients with unfavorable outcomes in 2 cases. Minimally invasive surgeries were performed in 30 patients. Eight patients with intraparenchymal tumors required conversion to open surgery. Type B pancreatic fistula occurred in 5 patients that led to arrosive bleeding in 2 cases (hemostasis was provided by endovascular method). Comparison of intraparenchymal and extraorgan tumors regarding the incidence of pancreatic fistula revealed odds ratio 5.26 (95% CI 1.5355; 18.0323, p=0.0041). Postoperative mortality was 2.1%.

CONCLUSION

Enucleation is advisable for highly differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors up to 2 cm. Minimally invasive enucleation is indicated for extraorgan tumors. Intraparenchymal tumors significantly increase the risk of postoperative complications.

Laparoscopic pancreatic enucleation: cystic lesions and proximity to the Wirsung duct increase postoperative pancreatic fistula

BACKGROUND

Risk factors for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) following pancreatic enucleation by the open approach (OpenEN) are well known. However, ENs are more frequently performed laparoscopically (LapEN). The aim of this study was to analyze the risk factors of POPF following LapEN.

METHODS AND PATIENTS

All patients in our prospective database who underwent LapEN were evaluated. We report the demographics, surgical, early and long-term outcomes. Numerous variables were analyzed to identify the risk factors of POPF.

RESULTS

From 2008 to 2020, 650 laparoscopic pancreatic resections were performed including 64 EN (10%). The median age was 51 years old (17-79), median BMI was 24 (19-48), and 44 patients were women (69%). The main presentation was an incidental diagnosis (n = 40; 62%), pain (n= 10;16%), and hypoglycemia (n = 8;12%). The main indications were neuroendocrine tumors (40; 63%), mucinous cystadenomas (15; 23%), intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasie (3; 5%), and other benign cysts (6; 9%). Lesions were located on the distal pancreas (43; 67%), head (n = 17; 27%), and neck (4; 6%). The median size was 20 mm (9-110); 30 mm (20-110) for mucinous cystadenoma and 18 mm (8-33) for NET. The median operative time was 90 mn (30-330), median blood loss was 20 ml (0-800) ml, and there were no transfusions and one conversion. There were no mortalities and overall morbidity (n = 22; 34%) included grades B and C POPF (10;16%) and post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (4; 6%). The median hospital stay was 7 days (3-42). There were no invaded lymph nodes and all cystic lesions were nonmalignant. After a mean follow-up of 24 months, there was no recurrence. The risk factors for grades B/C POPF were mucinous cystadenoma and proximity to the Wirsung duct < 3 mm.

CONCLUSION

In this series, the outcome of LapEN was excellent with no mortality and a low rate of morbidity. However, the risk of POPF is increased with cystic lesions and those close to the Wirsung duct.

Comparison of Outcomes of Enucleation vs. Standard Surgical Resection for Pancreatic Neoplasms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

With advancement in health technology, the detection rate of pancreatic neoplasms is increasing. Tissue sparing surgery (enucleation) as well as standard surgical resection are two commonly used modalities of management. There are studies comparing clinical outcomes between these two modalities; however, there is lack of studies that systematically pool the available findings to present conclusive and reliable evidence.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted using the PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases. Studies that were randomised controlled trials or cohort based or analysed retrospective data were considered for inclusion. Studies should have been done in adult patients with pancreatic neoplasms and should have examined the outcomes of interest by the two management modalities i.e., enucleation and standard surgical resection. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA software.

Results

A total of 20 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The operation time (in minutes) (WMD −78.20; 95% CI: −89.47, −66.93) and blood loss (in ml) (WMD −204.30; 95% CI: −281.70, −126.90) for enucleation was significantly lesser than standard surgical resection. The risk of endocrine (RR 0.32; 95% CI: 0.18, 0.56) and exocrine insufficiency (RR 0.16; 95% CI: 0.07, 0.34) was lower whereas the risk of post-operative pancreatic fistula (RR 1.46; 95% CI: 1.22, 1.75) was higher in enucleation, compared to standard surgical resection group. There were no differences in the risk of reoperation, readmission, recurrence, mortality within 90 days and 5-years overall mortality between the two groups.

Conclusions

Enucleation, compared to standard surgical resection, was associated with better clinical outcomes and therefore, might be considered for selected pancreatic neoplasms. There is a need for randomised controlled trials to document the efficacy of these two management techniques.

Laparoscopic versus open extended radical left pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: an international propensity-score matched study

BACKGROUND

A radical left pancreatectomy in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) may require extended, multivisceral resections. The role of a laparoscopic approach in extended radical left pancreatectomy (ERLP) is unclear since comparative studies are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after laparoscopic vs open ERLP in patients with PDAC.

METHODS

An international multicenter propensity-score matched study including patients who underwent either laparoscopic or open ERLP (L-ERLP; O-ERLP) for PDAC was performed (2007-2015). The ISGPS definition for extended resection was used. Primary outcomes were overall survival, margin negative rate (R0), and lymph node retrieval.

RESULTS

Between 2007 and 2015, 320 patients underwent ERLP in 34 centers from 12 countries (65 L-ERLP vs. 255 O-ERLP). After propensity-score matching, 44 L-ERLP could be matched to 44 O-ERLP. In the matched cohort, the conversion rate in L-ERLP group was 35%. The L-ERLP R0 resection rate (matched cohort) was comparable to O-ERLP (67% vs 48%; P = 0.063) but the lymph node yield was lower for L-ERLP than O-ERLP (median 11 vs 19, P = 0.023). L-ERLP was associated with less delayed gastric emptying (0% vs 16%, P = 0.006) and shorter hospital stay (median 9 vs 13 days, P = 0.005), as compared to O-ERLP. Outcomes were comparable for additional organ resections, vascular resections (besides splenic vessels), Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III complications, or 90-day mortality (2% vs 2%, P = 0.973). The median overall survival was comparable between both groups (19 vs 20 months, P = 0.571). Conversion did not worsen outcomes in L-ERLP.

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic approach may be used safely in selected patients requiring ERLP for PDAC, since morbidity, mortality, and overall survival seem comparable, as compared to O-ERLP. L-ERLP is associated with a high conversion rate and reduced lymph node yield but also with less delayed gastric emptying and a shorter hospital stay, as compared to O-ERLP.

Minimally-invasive versus open enucleation for pancreatic tumours: A propensity-score adjusted analysis

BACKGROUNDS/AIMS

This study aims to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of minimally-invasive enucleation (MIEn) of the pancreas versus open enucleation (OEn).

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of 20 consecutive patients who underwent pancreatic enucleation at a single institution.

RESULTS

Seven patients underwent MIEn, of which 3 were robotic and 4 were laparoscopic. After propensity-adjusted analysis, the only significant difference was a reduced rate of readmissions within 30 days in the MIEn group versus the OEn group [0 vs 4 (30.8%), p=0.0464]. There were no conversions to open in the MIEn group, and median operation time was similar in both groups. There was no difference in median EBL in both groups, and none of the patients in our series required blood transfusions. The overall morbidity rate was 45.0% and the major complication (Clavien-Dindo>2) rate was 15%; which was similar between both groups. Seven (35%) patients had a Grade B/C POPF, and there was no significant difference between the two groups for this. The MIEn group had a shorter median length of stay compared to OEn [5 days (range, 3-24) vs 8.5 days (range, 5-42)] this was not significant on propensity-adjusted analysis (p=0.3195). There was no post-operative 90-day/in-hospital mortality in all 20 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience demonstrates that MIEn was associated with similar perioperative outcomes and fewer readmissions compared to OEn.

Open and minimally invasive pancreatic neoplasms enucleation: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic enucleation (pEN) as parenchyma-sparing procedure for small pancreatic neoplasms is quickly becoming the most common surgical option in such setting. Nowadays, pEN is frequently carried out through a minimally invasive approach either laparoscopic or robotic. Its impact on overall perioperative complications and pancreatic fistula (POPF) is still under evaluation. The scope of our systematic review is to assess pEN's perioperative outcomes and to evaluate the effect of the minimally invasive techniques over POPF and other surgical complications.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search (time-frame January 1999-September 2018), considering exclusively those studies which included at least 5 cases of either open or minimally invasive pEN. Data regarding postoperative outcome and POPF were extracted and analyzed. We defined postoperative morbidities by the Clavien-Dindo classification while POPF according to the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF) definition.

RESULTS

Sixty-three studies met the criteria selected, accounting for a study population of 2485 patients. 27.7% had a minimally invasive pEN. The overall postoperative morbidity rate was 46.1% with 11.9% rated as severe (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3). Mortality rate was 0.69%. The minimally invasive approach to pEN led to a statistically significant reduction of both the overall POPF rate (28.7% vs. 45.9%, p < 0.001), and clinically significant B-C POPF (p < 0.027). The postoperative overall morbidity rate was clearly in favor of the minimally invasive approach (27.6% vs. 55.2%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our review confirms that pEN is a safe and feasible technique for the treatment of small benign or low-grade pancreatic neoplasms and it can be implemented with an acceptable morbidity rate along with low mortality. The minimally invasive approach is gaining widespread acceptance due to its supposed non-inferiority compared with the traditional open approach. In our review, it showed to be even better in terms of POPF incidence rate and short-term postoperative outcome. Still, such data need to be corroborated by randomized clinical trials.

Evolution of Laparoscopic Pancreatic Resections for Pancreatic and Periampullary Diseases: Perioperative Outcomes of 605 Patients at a High-Volume Center

Background: Laparoscopic pancreatectomy (LP) is increasingly performed with several institutional series and comparative studies reported. We have applied LP to a variety of pancreatic resections since 2004. This article is to report results of 15-year practice of 605 LPs for pancreatic and periampullary diseases. Methods: Patients with benign or malignant diseases in the pancreas and periampullary region, who underwent LP from June 2004 to June 2018, were retrospectively reviewed. The demographics and indications, and intraoperative and perioperative outcomes were evaluated. Results: A total of 605 consecutive LPs were analyzed, including 237 (39.2%) distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS), 116 (19.2%) spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP), 30 (5.0%) enucleation (EN), 30 (5.0%) central pancreatectomy (CP), 186 (30.7%) pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), and 6 (1.0%) pancreatoduodenectomy with total pancreatectomy (PDTP). The most common pathologic finding was pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (146, 24.1%). Conversion to open procedure was required in 22 patients (3.6%) (12 with PD, 8 with DPS, 1 with CP, and 1 with PDTP). The mean operative time was 241.5 ± 105.5 minutes (range 50-550 minutes) for the entire population and 367.1 ± 61.8 minutes (range 230-550 minutes) for PD. Clinically significant pancreatic fistula (ISGPF grade B and C) rate was 12.4% for the entire cohort and 16.1% for PD. Rate of Clavien-Dindo III-V complications was 17.4% for the entire cohort and 23.7% for PD. Ninety-day mortality was observed only in the cohort of patients undergoing PD (n = 4). Conclusions: The LP procedure appears to be technically safe and feasible, with an acceptable rate of morbidity when performed at our experienced, high-volume center. However, PD has less favorable outcomes and needs further evaluation.

Sporadic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor: Surgery of the primary tumor

The management of patients with sporadic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNET) is multi-disciplinary and often, multimodal. Surgery has a large part in treatment because it is the only potentially curative therapeutic modality if resection can be complete. The update reviews the operative indications and the different surgical techniques available (including parenchymal-sparing surgery) to treat the primary lesion according to patient status, preoperative work-up and whether the tumor is functioning or not. The place of observation for "small" non-functional sporadic PNET is also discussed.

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.

Surgical resection of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm by minimally invasive surgery-the robotic approach?

Over the past decade, there has been increasing adoption of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery world-wide and this has naturally expanded to the management of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PNENs). More recently, robotic pancreatic surgery (RPS) was introduced to overcome the limitations during laparoscopic pancreatic surgery (LPS). Due to the relative rarity of PNEN and the novelty of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery in particular RPS today, the evidence for robotic surgery in PNENs remains extremely limited. Presently, the available evidence is limited to a few low level retrospective case-control studies. These studies suggest that RPS may be associated with a higher splenic preservation rates and lower open conversion rates compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery. Ideally a prospective randomized trial should be performed but this would be extremely challenging due to the rarity of PNEN, making it almost impossible to conduct a sufficiently powered trial.

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.