HandPort-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy in massive splenomegaly

Can We Predict Immediate Outcome After Laparoscopic Splenectomy for Splenomegaly? Multivariate Analysis of Clinical, Anatomic, and Pathologic Features After 3D Reconstruction of the Spleen

The laparoscopic approach is the treatment of choice for splenectomy, but its definitive role in splenomegaly is controversial. Factors that influence immediate outcome are clinical, anatomic, and pathological. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive factors on outcome after laparoscopic splenectomy in splenomegaly. We reviewed patients submitted to laparoscopic splenectomy with a final spleen weight superior to 700 g. Three-dimensional reconstruction of the spleen was performed, and spleen volume and diameters were measured. Multivariate analysis showed that factors that predicted for conversion were mediolateral diameter ( P = .039, RR: 1.43) and platelet count ( P < .05, RR: 1). For intraoperative bleeding, the predictive factor was spleen volume ( P < .03, RR: 1.003). Anteroposterior spleen diameter was related to operative time ( P = .011), and the factor related to postoperative morbidity was age ( P = .049, RR: 0.941). Local anatomy and clinical factors affect surgical outcome in laparoscopic splenectomy for splenomegaly. These factors should be taken into account when planning this kind of procedure.

A meta-analysis study of laparoscopic versus open splenectomy with or without esophagogastric devascularization in the management of liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine whether laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) and LS with esophagogastric devascularization (LSED) were the minimally invasive alternative for portal hypertension.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A meta-analysis of comparative clinical trials was performed to assess our questions noted above. The databases PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Springerlink were searched.

RESULTS

In total, 725 patients with liver cirrhosis and/or portal hypertension from eight published comparative trials were included. The operation time in the laparoscopic group was more than that in the open group [weighted mean difference (WMD) 35.24 (16.74, 53.74); P<.001]. However, there were less intraoperative blood loss [WMD -194.84 (-321.34, -68.34); P=.003] and a shorter postoperative hospital stay [WMD -4.33 (-5.30, -3.36); P<.001] in the laparoscopic group. The incidence of complications was similar in the two groups. In the subgroup studies about LS versus open splenectomy, no significant differences were found in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and complication rates. The postoperative hospital stay in the LS group was apparently decreased [WMD -4.07 (-4.93, -3.21); P<.001]. Although the operation time of LSED was longer [WMD 43.23 (17.13, 69.32); P=.001], LSED was associated with less intraoperative blood loss [WMD -189.26 (-295.71, -82.81); P<.001] and a shorter postoperative hospital stay [WMD -5.41 (-7.84, -2.98); P<.001]. Meta-analysis did not favor either LSED or open splenectomy with esophagogastric devascularization in term of complication rates.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this meta-analysis were in favor of LS and LSED for being a safe, minimally invasion alternative for patients with liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension.

Current concepts of laparoscopic splenectomy in elective patients

Formerly, open splenectomy represented the conventional surgical treatment for many hematologic diseases. Currently, thanks to permanent technical development and improved skills, also laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) has become a recognized procedure in the treatment of spleen diseases, even in case of splenomegaly. A systematic review was performed with the aim of recalling the proved concepts of this surgical treatment and to browse new devices and techniques and their impact on the surgical outcome. The literature search was initially conducted in PubMed by entering general queries related to LS. The record identified through PubMed searching (n = 1599) was then screened by applying several criteria (study published in English from 1991 to 2013 with abstract available, by excluding systematic/non-systematic reviews, meta-analysis, practice guidelines, case reports, and study involving animals). The articles assessed for eligibility (n = 160) were primarily evaluated by excluding studies that did not report operative time and conversion to open surgery. For articles that treated multiport LS we included only clinical trials with patients > 20. The studies included in qualitative synthesis were 23. The search strategy carried out in PubMed does not allow to obtain an overview of the items returned by the main queries. With this aim we replicated the search in the Web of Science^TM database, only including the studies published in English in the period 1991-2013 with no other filter/selection criteria. The full records (n = 1141) and cited references returned by Web of Science^TM were analyzed with the visualization of similarities (VOS) mapping technique. Maps of title/abstract text corpus and bibliographic coupling of authors obtained by applying the VOS approach were presented. If in normal-size or moderately enlarged spleens the laparoscopic approach is unquestionable, in massive splenomegaly the optimal technique remain to be determined. In this setting, prospective randomized trials to compare open vs LS are needed. Between the new techniques of LS the robotic single port splenectomy has the ability to join all the positive aspects of both techniques. Data about this topic are too initial and need to be confirmed with further studies.

Minimally invasive splenectomy: an update and review

Laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) has become an established standard of care in the management of surgical diseases of the spleen. The present article is an update and review of current procedures and controversies regarding minimally invasive splenectomy. We review the indications and contraindications for LS as well as preoperative considerations. An individual assessment of the procedures and outcomes of multiport laparoscopic splenectomy, hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy, robotic splenectomy, natural orifice transluminal endoscopic splenectomy and single-port splenectomy is included. Furthermore, this review examines postoperative considerations after LS, including the postoperative course of uncomplicated patients, postoperative portal vein thrombosis, infections and malignancy.

Comparative treatment and literature review for laparoscopic splenectomy alone versus preoperative splenic artery embolization splenectomy

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic splenectomy has been gradually regarded as an acceptable therapeutic approach for patients with massive splenomegaly, intraoperative blood loss remains an important complication. In an effort to evaluate the most effective and safe treatment of splenomegaly, we compared three methods of surgery for treating splenomegaly, including open splenectomy, laparoscopic splenectomy, and a combination of preoperative splenic artery embolization plus laparoscopic splenectomy.

METHODS

From January 2006 to August 2011, 79 patients underwent splenectomy in our hospital. Of them, 20 patients underwent a combined treatment of preoperative splenic artery embolization and laparoscopic splenectomy (group 1), 30 patients had laparoscopic splenectomy alone (group 2), and 29 patients underwent open splenectomy (group 3). Patients' demographics, perioperative data, clinical outcome, and hematological changes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Preoperative splenic artery embolization plus laparoscopic splenectomy was successfully performed in all patients in group 1. One patient in group 2 required an intraoperative conversion to traditional open splenectomy because of severe blood loss. Compared with group 2, significantly shorter operating time, less intraoperative blood loss, and shorter postoperative hospital stay were noted in group 1. No marked significant differences in postoperative complications of either group were observed. Compared with group 3, group 1 had less intraoperative blood loss, shorter postoperative stay, and fewer complications. No significant differences were found in operating time. There was a marked increase in platelet count and white blood count in both groups during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative splenic artery embolization with laparoscopic splenectomy reduced the operating time and decreased intraoperative blood loss when compared with laparoscopic splenectomy alone or open splenectomy. Splenic artery embolization is a useful intraoperative adjunctive procedure for patients with splenomegaly because of the benefit of perioperative outcomes.

Laparoscopic splenectomy: standardized approach

Laparoscopic splenectomy was first reported in 1991-1992 by several groups. The impact and role of laparoscopy for splenectomy can be considered as significant as that for gallbladder disease, achalasia, esophageal reflux, and adrenal disease. In many centers, the laparoscopic approach is now routine for most cases of elective splenectomy. The laparoscopic approach is associated with reduced morbidity, especially pulmonary, wound, and infectious complications. This article reviews a standardized approach to laparoscopic and hand-assisted splenectomy and covers indications, operative strategy, and complications. Several special considerations, including massive splenomegaly, postsplenectomy thrombosis of the portosplenic venous system, and accessory spleens are also discussed.

The feasibility and effectiveness of a hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy for hypersplenism in patients after living-donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

A laparoscopic splenectomy in patients who previously underwent living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is thought to be technically difficult because of the presence of severe adhesions and splenomegaly. This report documents the efficacy and safety of a hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy (HALS) for hypersplenism in patients after LDLT.

METHODS

Five patients underwent HALS for hypersplenism after LDLT between 1999 and 2007. The medical records of those patients were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean operative time was 237+/-12 minutes. The mean blood loss was 229+/-100 mL and the mean weight of excised spleen was 461+/-46 g. There was no conversion to open surgery. The number of platelets and leukocytes were significantly increased after surgery. No major complications were observed except for a patient who suffered paralytic ileus postoperatively. The mean hospital stay after the operation was 16.7+/-2.5 days.

CONCLUSIONS

HALS for patients after LDLT is a feasible and safe procedure. This technique can thus become a standard procedure after LDLT.

Prospective randomized comparison of clinical results between hand-assisted laparoscopic and open splenectomies

BACKGROUND

Although some studies have compared laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy (HALS) in splenomegaly cases, no study has analyzed the differences between HALS and open splenectomy (OS). This study aimed to compare the HALS and OS techniques in splenomegaly cases.

METHODS

This prospective study included 27 patients undergoing splenectomy for splenic disorders at the Department of General Surgery, Istanbul Medical Faculty between February and October 2007. Open splenectomy was performed for 14 patients and HALS for the remaining 13 patients.

RESULTS

The end points compared included incision length, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drain output and duration, postoperative pain scores, length of postoperative hospitalization, and perioperative complications. The authors found benefits of HALS over OS for incision length, postoperative pain score, postoperative drain output and duration, and hospital stay. The main advantages of the HALS technique over OS were less postoperative pain (p = 0.0002), shorter hospital stay (p = 0.004), and shorter abdominal incision (p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

For splenomegaly, HALS significantly facilitates the surgical procedure and reduces the hospital stay while maintaining the advantages of OS such as tactile sense as well as easy and atraumatic manipulation of enlarged spleens.

Laparoscopic splenectomy: the clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES)

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) has become the standard approach for most splenectomy cases, some areas still remain controversial. To date, the indications that preclude laparoscopic splenectomy are not clearly defined. In view of this, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) has developed clinical practice guidelines for LS.

METHODS

An international expert panel was invited to appraise the current literature and to develop evidence-based recommendations. A consensus development conference using a nominal group process convened in May 2007. Its recommendations were presented at the annual EAES congress in Athens, Greece, on 5 July 2007 for discussion and further input. After a further Delphi process between the experts, the final recommendations were agreed upon.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic splenectomy is indicated for most benign and malignant hematologic diseases independently of the patient's age and body weight. Preoperative investigation is recommended for obtaining information on spleen size and volume as well as the presence of accessory splenic tissue. Preoperative vaccination against meningococcal, pneumococcal, and Haemophilus influenzae type B infections is recommended in elective cases. Perioperative anticoagulant prophylaxis with subcutaneous heparin should be administered to all patients and prolonged anticoagulant prophylaxis to high-risk patients. The choice of approach (supine [anterior], semilateral or lateral) is left to the surgeon's preference and concomitant conditions. In cases of massive splenomegaly, the hand-assisted technique should be considered to avoid conversion to open surgery and to reduce complication rates. The expert panel still considered portal hypertension and major medical comorbidities as contraindications to LS.

CONCLUSION

Despite a lack of level 1 evidence, LS is a safe and advantageous procedure in experienced hands that has displaced open surgery for almost all indications. To support the clinical evidence, further randomized controlled trials on different issues are mandatory.

Significance of laparoscopic splenectomy in patients with hypersplenism

OBJECTIVE

This study was aimed at investigating the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive laparoscopic splenectomy in patients with hypersplenism secondary to cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND

While advances have been made in the treatment of liver cancer and chronic hepatitis, certain treatments such as radio frequency ablation (RFA) must often be discontinued due to thrombocytopenia caused by hypersplenism. Laparoscopic splenectomy is performed to treat diseases as idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, but is contraindicated for hypersplenism in many institutions. Few studies have thus examined the safety and efficacy of this approach.

METHODS

Efficacy and safety were retrospectively analyzed for laparoscopic splenectomies starting from January 2003. Relationships between postoperative increases in platelet count and thrombopoietin, platelet-associated immunoglobulin, excised spleen weight, and serum parameters were examined. Perioperative data of open splenectomies starting from January 1990 were compared with those of laparoscopic splenectomies.

RESULTS

No laparoscopic cases were converted to open surgery in this series. Mean operative times of open and laparoscopic splenectomy were 205 and 173 min respectively. Mean blood losses were 750 and 359 ml (P < 0.05) and the mean weights of excised spleen were 460 and 525 g respectively. Postoperatively, no changes in liver function were noted, and platelet and leukocyte counts were significantly increased. Compared with preoperative platelet count, degree of increase at 2 weeks postoperatively did not correlate with preoperative thrombopoietin levels, but significantly correlated with levels of platelet-associated immunoglobulin and spleen volume (P < 0.05). Postoperative portal or splenic vein thrombosis (PSVT) was seen in 3 patients and these patients did not exhibit any clinical symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic splenectomy is a safe technique for the treatment of hypersplenism and contributes to postoperative increases in platelet counts. Postoperative increases in platelet count seem to depend on platelet-associated immunoglobulin level and spleen weight, which may be valuable prognosticators.

Concomitant intraoperative splenic artery embolization and laparoscopic splenectomy versus laparoscopic splenectomy: comparison of treatment outcome

INTRODUCTION

Although laparoscopic splenectomy has become the preferred treatment of choice for hematologic-related splenic disorders, intraoperative blood loss remains a common occurrence. In an effort to reduce this risk, we evaluate the potential role and clinical outcome of concomitant intraoperative splenic artery embolization and laparoscopic splenectomy.

METHODS

Between June 2000 and July 2005, 18 patients with hematologically related splenic disorders underwent combined intraoperative splenic artery embolization and laparoscopic splenectomy (group 1). For comparison, we studied 18 age- and gender-matched case controls undergoing same operations during the same period (group 2). Intraoperative data and clinical outcome were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Technical success was 100% in group 1. One patient in group 2 was converted to open splenectomy because of severe blood loss, resulting in a technical success rate of 95%. The mean splenic size in group 1 and group 2 was 15.5 +/- 4.7 cm (range, 12-23 cm) and 15.7 +/- 6.8 (range, 11-24 cm), respectively (not significant [NS]). Mean operative time in group 1 and group 2 was 175 minutes and 162 minutes, respectively (NS). Significantly less intraoperative blood loss was noted in group 1 (mean, 25 mL; range, 15-63 mL) compared with group 2 (mean, 240 mL; range, 150-420 mL; P < .003). There was an even greater difference in blood loss between the 2 groups when the splenic size was greater than 18 cm (mean 35 mL in group 1 versus 350 mL in group 2, P < .001). No differences were noted in postoperative recovery, return of bowel function, or length of hospital stay between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant splenic artery embolization and laparoscopic splenic reduced operative blood loss when compared with laparoscopic splenectomy procedure alone. Splenic artery embolization is a useful intraoperative adjunctive procedure that should be considered in patients undergoing laparoscopic splenectomy for hematologic disorders who are Jehovah's Witness or with significant hypersplenism because of benefit of reduced blood loss.

Laparoscopic splenectomy: present status and future perspective

Laparoscopic splenectomy has become widely accepted as the approach of choice for the surgical treatment of benign and malignant hematologic diseases. Advances in technology have led to better outcomes for the procedure, and have allowed surgeons to apply the technique to disease processes that were at one time felt to be contraindications to laparoscopic splenectomy. However, challenges still remain. There is a steep learning curve associated with the procedure. The development of cost-effective laparoscopic simulators to target the skills required for laparoscopic splenectomy and other laparoscopic procedures is essential. The advent of devices which isolate and seal the large blood vessels that surround the spleen have reduced intra-operative bleeding and minimized conversions to open splenectomy. Improvements in optics and instrumentation, as well as robotic technology, will continue to define the frontier of minimally invasive surgery, and further facilitate the acceptance of laparoscopic splenectomy for the treatment of benign and malignant hematologic diseases.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy in the setting of splenomegaly

BACKGROUND

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) devices may be well suited to splenectomy in cases of splenomegaly.

METHODS

All cases of HALS for splenectomy between 1997 and 2001 were reviewed. Patient characteristics, operative details, and morbidity and mortality were analyzed.

RESULTS

HALS for splenectomy was performed in 54 patients. A total of 39 patients with massive splenomegaly (MS) (>600 g) were identified. The average weight of the MS group was 1285 +/- 505 g. There was one (3%) conversion. Operative time was 159 +/- 65 min, estimated blood loss was 257 +/- 240 ml, and length of hospital stay was 5.4 +/- 2.9 days. Morbidity was limited to 13 patients (24%), and there were two postoperative mortalities (5.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

HALS for splenectomy in the setting of splenomegaly is feasible and safe. For the surgeon considering a laparoscopic approach in the setting of splenomegaly, a hand-assisted technique is ideally suited for removal of the enlarged spleen.

Laparoscopic splenectomy for lymphoproliferative disease

BACKGROUND

Elective laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) achieves excellent results for benign hematologic diseases. The role of LS for hematologic malignancies is harder to define owing to associated splenomegaly and patient disease that may alter outcome.

METHODS

Retrospective review of single institution experience 1996 through 2002. To limit variability of disease processes, only patients with immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) and lymphoproliferative disease (LPD) were studied.

RESULTS

A total of 211 LS have been performed, including 73 for LPD and 86 for ITP. Patients with LPD were significantly older, 61 vs 46 years p<0.001; male, 45 (62%) vs 33 (38%), p<0.001; and larger splenic weight, 680 vs 162 g, p<0.001. Fifty-nine patients (81%) with LPD were operated with standard LS with a conversion rate of 15%. Hand-assisted LS was performed in 14 patients (19%), and three were converted to open. Compared to ITP, patients with LPD had longer operative time, 148 vs 126 min, p<0001, and higher blood loss, 200 vs 100 cc, p = 0.004. There was one mortality (0.6%), and morbidity occurred in six patients (8%) with LPD and seven (8%) with ITP. The median length of stay was 3 days for LPD and 2 days for ITP, p = 0.03. Forty-six patients were principally operated for a diagnosis, and 27 (60%) were found to have lymphoma.

CONCLUSIONS

LS can be performed safely in patients with LPD, and when used judiciously with hand-assisted techniques can be performed with low conversion and morbidity rates. Splenectomy plays an important role in establishing the diagnosis of lymphoma in LPD.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy in patients with splenomegaly or prior upper abdominal operation

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) in patients with significant splenomegaly or prior upper abdominal operation is technically challenging with a high conversion rate to open operation. We hypothesized that hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy (HLS) in this setting would improve operative (OR) outcomes without impacting post-OR ileus, length of stay, morbidity, or mortality, compared with LS.

METHODS

All patients with splenomegaly (spleen weight > or = 500 g) or prior upper abdominal operation undergoing LS or HLS between March 1996 and June 2001 were reviewed. Nonparametric continuous variables were expressed as median and intraquartile range with statistical significance determined by Wilcoxon rank sum test.

RESULTS

Of 41 patients reviewed, 22 underwent HLS, whereas 19 underwent LS. Median OR time for HLS was significantly less than for LS (161 minutes vs 212 minutes, P =.004). HLS was associated with a lower conversion rate (13.6% vs 36.8%, P =.08) and blood loss (325 mL vs 550 mL, P =.18) than LS, which approached statistical significance. HLS did not increase post-OR ileus, length of stay, morbidity, or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

HLS in patients with significant splenomegaly or prior upper abdominal operation significantly shortens OR time compared with LS without adversely impacting post-OR ileus, length of stay, morbidity, or mortality. In addition, HLS may be associated with a lower conversion rate and decreased blood loss.