Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy

Laparoscopic versus open central pancreatectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis in a single centre

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy (LCP) has been implemented in pancreatic surgery; however, open surgery is still the predominant approach for central pancreatectomy (CP). Our objective was to compare LCP with open CP (OCP).

METHODS

Data were collected from patients with tumours located in the pancreatic neck and proximal body who underwent CP in the Department of Pancreatic Surgery West China Hospital from January 1, 2010, to June 30, 2019. A comparison between the LCP and OCP groups was performed.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients underwent CP via the laparoscopic approach, and 96 patients underwent CP via the open approach. Using 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM), 12 patients in the LCP group were matched to 21 in the OCP group. Regarding safety, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) was not significantly different between the two groups (13.3% vs. 12.5%, P = 1.000), even with PSM (16.7% vs. 14.3%, P = 1.000). However, regarding effectiveness, the operative time in the OCP group was significantly shorter than that in the LCP group before (307.0 ± 92.3 ml vs. 220.6 ± 63.6 ml, P < 0.000) and after (300.3 ± 90.2 ml vs. 212.7 ± 44.4 ml, P = 0.002) PSM. Regarding length of stay (LOS), there was no difference between the two groups before (13.1 ± 13.7 days vs. 12.7 ± 10.1 days, P = 0.376) and after PSM (14.4 ± 15.1 days vs. 14.5 ± 16.2 days, P = 0.985). The length of the resected pancreas was shorter in the OCP group than in the LCP group before PSM (50.0 ± 13.2 mm vs. 41.1 ± 11.1 mm, P = 0.043). However, there was no difference between the two groups after PSM (47.9 ± 12.5 mm vs. 37.9 ± 10.4 mm, P = 0.084). Moreover, the other variables showed no difference between the two groups before and after PSM.

CONCLUSION

LCP can demonstrate similar safety and effectiveness to OCP, even in the early stages of the learning curve.

Robotic central pancreatectomy

Central pancreatectomy (CP) is a parenchyma-sparing procedure that can be utilized in the resection of tumors of the neck or the proximal body of the pancreas. Among 872 open CP reported since 1993, the mean rate of morbidity was 43.2% and mean rate of mortality was 0.24%. The mean pancreatic fistula rate was 28%. The rate of clinically significant pancreatic fistulas with ISGPF Grades B and C was 19%. The rate of development of post-operative diabetes mellitus was at 2% and the average incidence of exocrine insufficiency experienced by patients undergoing open CP was 4.4%. Also, the mean length of hospital stay was around 15 days. In comparison, a total of 100 patients underwent either laparoscopic or robotic CP with a mean rate of morbidity of 37.3% and mean rate of mortality of 0%. Also, the mean rate of development of pancreatic fistula was 36.6%. The rate of clinically significant pancreatic fistulas with ISGPF Grades B and C was 17%. The rate of development of post-operative diabetes mellitus was at 1.5%. None of the patients included in these series developed any postoperative exocrine insufficiency. The mean length of hospital stay was around 13 days. Standard procedures such as DP and PD are associated with lower rates of short-term morbidity such as pancreatic fistula development but are also accompanied with a higher rate of long-term endocrine and exocrine insufficiency due to the significant loss of normal pancreatic parenchyma when compared to CP. It can be inferred, albeit from limited and small retrospective studies and case reports, that conventional and robotic-assisted laparoscopic approaches to CP are safe and feasible in highly specialized centers.

Minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and pancreatogastrostomy: current surgical technique and outcomes

Recent improvements in imaging techniques and more frequent use of cross-sectional imaging have led to an increase in the identification of benign and low-grade lesions of the pancreas. Patients with resectable cancers are commonly treated by either a Whipple procedure or distal pancreatectomy (DP) based on the location of the tumor. Central pancreatectomy (CP) is a less commonly performed operation that has recently been utilized for resection of these now more frequently diagnosed low-grade and benign lesions located in the mid pancreas. Lesions that may have a relatively more indolent nature include branch-type intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMNs), mucinous cystic neoplasms, neuroendocrine tumors, and solid pseudopapillary tumors. The goal of a CP is complete extirpation of the lesion, while preserving pancreatic parenchyma to reduce the risks of developing diabetes and exocrine insufficiency (EI). Although open CP has been shown to be safe and efficacious, the outcomes of a minimally invasive approach are still relatively underreported and therefore unknown. In this paper, we describe our surgical approach to performing a CP with an accompanying video demonstration of the key portions of the operation.

Short and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic compared to open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is now established as standard of care for a variety of gastrointestinal procedures for benign and malignant indications. However, due to concerns regarding superiority to open liver resection (OLR), the uptake of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been slow. Data on long-term outcomes of LLR for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) remain limited. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of short and long-term outcomes of LLR compared to OLR for CRLM.

METHODS

Five electronic databases were systematically searched for studies comparing LLR and OLR for CRLM and reporting on survival outcomes. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and recurrence free survival (RFS). Secondary outcomes were operative time, estimated blood loss, post-operative major morbidity, mortality, length of stay (LOS), and resection margins.

RESULTS

Eight non-randomized studies (NRS) were included (n=2,017 total patients). Six were matched cohort studies. LLR reduced estimated blood loss [mean difference: -108.9; 95% confidence interval (CI), -214.0 to -3.7) and major morbidity [relative risk (RR): 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.83], but not mortality. No difference was observed in operative time, LOS, resection margins, R0 resections, and recurrence. Survival data could not be pooled. No studies reported inferior survival with LLR. OS varied from 36% to 60% for LLR and 37% to 65% for OLR. RFS ranged from 14% to 30% for LLR and 22% to 38% for OLR. According to the grade classification, the strength of evidence was low to very low for all outcomes. The use of parenchymal sparing resections with LLR and OLR could not be assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on limited retrospective evidence, LLR offers reduced morbidity and blood loss compared to OLR for CRLM. Comparable oncologic outcomes can be achieved. Although LLR cannot be considered as standard of care for CRLM, it is beneficial for well-selected patients and lesions. Therefore, LLR should be part of the liver surgeon's armamentarium.

Laparoscopic long sleeve pancreaticogastrostomy (LPG): a novel pancreatic anastomosis following central pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Central pancreatectomy (CP) is preferred to distal pancreatectomy (DP) for the excision of benign tumours at the neck or body of the pancreas, in order to preserve pancreatic function and the spleen. However, the pancreaticoenterostomy is technically difficult to perform laparoscopically and the postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rate is high.

METHODS

A novel laparoscopic reconstruction of the pancreatic stump during CP is described, the laparoscopic long sleeve pancreaticogastrostomy (LPG).

RESULTS

Two males and two females with a median age of 49 years had a laparoscopic CP with LPG. After a median follow-up of 27.5 months, there was no mortality. One patient had a grade A POPF, managed conservatively.

CONCLUSIONS

The LPG is a safe and technically less demanding method to reconstruct pancreatic drainage laparoscopically.

Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy for benign or low-grade malignant lesions in the pancreatic neck and proximal body

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy (LCP) is a parenchyma-sparing minimally invasive surgical technique for removal of benign or low-grade malignant lesions from the neck and proximal body of the pancreas. The aim of this study was to compare the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of LCP with those of other pancreatectomies.

METHODS

During the study period, January 2007 to December 2010 (median follow-up 40.6 months), 287 pancreatectomies were performed for lesions in the neck and proximal body of the pancreas. To compare the clinical outcomes of LCP and other pancreatectomies, 26 cases of LCP, 14 cases of open central pancreatectomy (OCP), and 96 cases of extended laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (E-LDP) were selected.

RESULTS

Tumor sizes in the LCP (2.2 cm) and OCP (2.9 cm) groups were smaller than in the E-LDP (4.0 cm) group. Mean operation time in the LCP group (350.2 min) was longer than in the OCP (270.3 min) and E-LDP groups (210.6 min). There were more surgical complications in the LCP (38.5 %) and OCP groups (50 %) than in the E-LDP group (14.6 %). Mean duration of postoperative hospital stay was 13.8 days for the LCP group, which was significantly shorter than for the OCP group (22.4 days). New-onset diabetes was less frequent after LCP than after E-LDP (11.5 vs. 30.8 %).

CONCLUSIONS

In selected patients with small and benign tumors in the pancreatic neck and proximal body LCP leads to increased postoperative morbidity but earlier postoperative recovery than OCP, and excellent postoperative pancreatic function (compared with E-LDP). LCP should, therefore, be considered a valid therapeutic option for selected patients.

Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy with pancreaticojejunostomy: preliminary experience with 8 cases

BACKGROUND

Central pancreatectomy has been accepted as an alternative procedure for treating benign or low-grade malignant tumors in the pancreatic neck or proximal body of the pancreas, which preserves pancreatic parenchyma and function. In this study, we present our experience of laparoscopic central pancreatectomy with pancreaticojejunostomy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From April 2011 to February 2013, 8 patients underwent laparoscopic central pancreatectomy with a Roux-en-Y modified "dunking" or duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy for benign or low-grade malignant tumors in the pancreatic neck or proximal body of the pancreas at the Department of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Hangzhou, China. Surgical procedure, postoperative course, and follow-up data were collected.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy was performed successfully in all the patients. The pancreaticojejunostomy was executed with a modified "dunking" pancreaticojejunostomy (n=7) or duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy (n=1). The mean operative time was 286±27 minutes (range, 250-330 minutes), with a mean blood loss of 57±21 mL (range, 30-100 mL). Mortality was 0%, and perioperative morbidity was 37.5% (pancreatic fistula [grade A], bleeding of a splenic vein branch, and retroperitoneal infection). The median postoperative hospital stay was 10 days (range, 6-38 days). At a median follow-up of 7.5 months (range, 2-24 months), all patients were alive without any exocrine or endocrine insufficiency or recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy is feasible and safe. The modified "dunking" pancreaticojejunostomy can be performed safely in this approach.

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.

Systematic review of central pancreatectomy and meta-analysis of central versus distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Central pancreatectomy (CP) is a parenchyma-sparing surgical procedure that enables the removal of benign and/or low-grade malignant lesions from the neck and proximal body of the pancreas. The aim of this review was to evaluate the short- and long-term surgical results of CP from all published studies, and the results of comparative studies of CP versus distal pancreatectomy (DP).

METHODS

Eligible studies published between 1988 and 2010 were reviewed systematically. Comparisons between CP and DP were pooled and analysed by meta-analytical techniques using random- or fixed-effects models, as appropriate.

RESULTS

Ninety-four studies, involving 963 patients undergoing CP, were identified. Postoperative morbidity and pancreatic fistula rates were 45·3 and 40·9 per cent respectively. Endocrine and exocrine pancreatic insufficiency was reported in 5·0 and 9·9 per cent of patients. The overall mortality rate was 0·8 per cent. Compared with DP, CP had a higher postoperative morbidity rate and a higher incidence of pancreatic fistula, but a lower risk of endocrine insufficiency (relative risk (RR) 0·22, 95 per cent confidence interval 0·14 to 0·35; P < 0·001). The risk of exocrine failure was also lower after CP, although this was not significant (RR 0·59, 0·32 to 1·07; P = 0·082).

CONCLUSION

CP is a safe procedure with good long-term functional reserve. In situations where DP represents an alternative, CP is associated with a slightly higher risk of early complications.

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive central pancreatectomy: technique and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Central pancreatectomy is a definitive treatment for low-grade tumors of the pancreatic neck that preserves pancreatic and splenic function at the potential expense of postoperative pancreatic fistula. We analyzed outcomes after robot-assisted central pancreatectomy (RACP) to reexamine the risk-benefit profile in the era of minimally invasive surgery.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of nine RACP performed between August 2009 through June 2010 at a single institution.

RESULTS

The average age of the cohort was 64 (range 18-75 years) with six women (67 %). Indications for surgery included: five benign cystic neoplasm and four pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor. Median operative time was 425 min (range 305-506 min) with 190 ml median blood loss (range 50-350 ml) and one conversion to open due to poor visualization. Median tumor size was 3.0 cm (range 1.9-6.0 cm); all patients achieved R0 status. Pancreaticogastrostomy was performed in seven cases and pancreaticojejunostomy in two. The median length of hospital stay was 10 days (range 7-19). Two clinically significant pancreatic fistulae occurred with one requiring percutaneous drainage. No patients exhibited worsening diabetes or exocrine insufficiency at the 30-day postoperative visit.

CONCLUSIONS

RACP can be performed with safety and oncologic outcomes equivalent to published open series. Although the rate of pancreatic fistula was high, only 22 % had clinically significant events, and none developed worsening pancreatic endocrine or exocrine dysfunction.

Initial experiences in robot-assisted middle pancreatectomy

OBJECTIVES

Initial results in robot-assisted middle pancreatectomy (MP) have been encouraging. However, data comparing outcomes of robot-assisted MP with those of open MP are limited. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes in patients undergoing open and robot-assisted MP, respectively.

METHODS

Outcomes in an initial experience with seven consecutive patients undergoing robot-assisted MP were compared with those in 36 patients undergoing open MP.

RESULTS

The robot-assisted MP group included five women and two men with a median age of 55 years (range: 30-62 years). Median tumour size, operative time and blood loss were 3.0 cm (range: 0.5-5.0 cm), 210 min (range: 150-330 min) and 200 ml (range: 50-400 ml), respectively. Pancreaticogastrostomy was performed in all patients. No transfusion was given intraoperatively. Pathological examination revealed five serous cystic neoplasms, one mixed-type intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm and one lipoma. Five patients experienced postoperative pancreatic fistula and one experienced post-pancreatectomy haemorrhage. No operative mortality was noted. Compared with the open MP group, the robot-assisted MP group demonstrated a shorter median length of postoperative gastrointestinal tract recovery [2 days (range: 2-3 days) versus 4 days (range: 2-11 days); P = 0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted MP can be performed safely with satisfactory efficacy; patients experienced faster gastrointestinal tract recovery compared with patients undergoing open surgery.

Laparoscopic pancreatectomy for malignancy

Utilization of laparoscopic techniques for resection of the pancreas has slowly gained acceptance in specific situations and is now being applied to more challenging endeavors, such as pancreaticoduodenectomy for cancer. This review provides a summary of laparoscopic applications for pancreatic malignancy, with specific attention to the most common methods of pancreatic resection and their respective oncologic outcomes, including margin status, lymph node retrieval, and survival.

Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy: our institution's 5-year experience

BACKGROUND

Application of minimally invasive techniques in the surgical management of distal pancreatic lesions is increasing. Despite this, numbers of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy remain low and limited to treatment of benign and premalignant lesions.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 31 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy from 2005 to 2010. Patients were grouped according to mode of surgical access: open (ODP) or laparoscopic (LDP). Perioperative parameters were compared.

RESULTS

Twenty-one (67.7%) patients underwent ODP and 10 (32.3%) LDP (median age 61; 80.0% females in LDP group, p = 0.030). Postoperative morbidity rate were comparable between the two groups. In the LDP group, there were significantly lower estimated blood loss (p < 0.001) and amount of blood transfusion (p = 0.001), smaller tumor size (p = 0.010) and fewer lymph nodes harvested (p = 0.020), shorter postoperative length of stay (p = 0.020), and shorter length of stay in surgical high dependency (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

LDP is a safe, efficient technique for resection of benign and premalignant pancreatic lesions. Indices reflecting perioperative outcomes in this study are highly competitive with those in other major centers.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with division of the pancreatic neck for benign and borderline malignant tumor in the proximal body of the pancreas

BACKGROUND

Conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (DP) is now regarded as a safe, effective treatment modality; however, pancreatic transections are mostly believed to be somewhere between the body and tail of the pancreas. Laparoscopic DP, with its division at the pancreatic neck (subtotal pancreatectomy [STP]), is more challenging because there are major vascular structures, such as the celiac axis, coronary vein, and superior mesenteric vein-splenic vein-portal vein (SMV-SV-PV) confluence around the pancreatic neck portion to be dissected.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Ten patients underwent laparoscopic STP with pancreatic division at the level of SMV-SV-PV confluence for benign and borderline pancreatic disease.

RESULTS

Three patients were male and 7 were female, with a median age of 60 years (range, 28-73). All patients had benign or borderline malignant tumors in the body near the neck of the pancreas, with a median tumor size of 3 cm (range, 1-9.2). The operation time was a median of 287.5 minutes (range, 160-480). The intraopeative bleeding was a median of 300 mL (range, 100-700). Spleen preservation was carried out in 8 patients. Compared with open DP with the division of the pancreatic neck, a more frequent rate of spleen preservation (P = 0.004), longer operation time (P = 0.006), and early postoperative recovery presented by early intake of a soft diet (P = 0.001) and earlier discharge (P = 0.03) were significantly more frequent in the laparoscopic STP group. In a comparative study with laparoscopic DP, the longer segment of resected pancreas (P < 0.001), smaller amount of blood loss (P = 0.019), and high rate of spleen preservation (P = 0.019) were also noted in the laparoscopic STP group.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic DP with division of the pancreatic neck is considered feasible and safe.

Extent of surgical resections for intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms

Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) can involve the main pancreatic duct (MD-IPMNs) or its secondary branches (BD-IPMNs) in a segmental of multifocal/diffuse fashion. Growing evidence indicates that BD-IPMNs are less likely to harbour cancer and in selected cases these lesions can be managed non operatively. For surgery, clarification is required on: (1) when to resect an IPMN; (2) which type of resection should be performed; and (3) how much pancreas should be resected. In recent years parenchyma-sparing resections as well as laparoscopic procedures have being performed more frequently by pancreatic surgeons in order to decrease the rate of postoperative pancreatic insufficiency and to minimize the surgical impact of these operations. However, oncological radicality is of paramount importance, and extended resections up to total pancreatectomy may be necessary in the setting of IPMNs. In this article the type and extension of surgical resections in patients with MD-IPMNs and BD-IPMNs are analyzed, evaluating perioperative and long-term outcomes. The role of standard and parenchyma-sparing resections is discussed as well as different strategies in the case of multifocal neoplasms.

Initial experiences using robot-assisted central pancreatectomy with pancreaticogastrostomy: a potential way to advanced laparoscopic pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Benign and borderline malignant pancreatic tumors are increasing. Function-preserving and minimally invasive pancreatectomy may be an ideal approach for these tumors.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively evaluated their initial experiences with five consecutive robotic central pancreatectomies (CPs). They also compared the perioperative outcome for open CPs performed in their institution.

RESULTS

The five women in the study had a median age of 45 years (range 36-64 years). A solid pseudopapillary tumor of the pancreas was found in four patients, and a pancreatic endocrine tumor was found in one patient. The tumor was relatively small (median size, 1.5 cm; range, 1-2 cm). All remnant pancreases were managed using pancreaticogastrostomy. The median operation time was 480 min (range 360-480 min), and the median estimated intraoperative bleeding was 200 ml (range 100-600 ml). No transfusion was given during the perioperative period. The median hospital stay was 12 days (range 9-28 days). Only one patient experienced postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B), which was managed using the percutaneous drainage procedure. No operative morality was noted. In a comparative analysis with open CP, the robotic CP group demonstrated a smaller asymptomatic (17 out of 10 patients vs none, p = 0.026) tumor (5.9 ± 6.4 vs 1.4 ± 0.4 cm; p = 0.055), a longer operation time (286.5 ± 90.2 vs 432.0 ± 65.7 min, p = 0.013), and less intraoperative bleeding (432.0 ± 65.7 vs 286.5 ± 90.2 ml, p = 0.013).

CONCLUSION

Central pancreatectomy can be selected carefully as an appropriate surgical option for benign and borderline malignant lesions limited to the pancreatic neck area. The robotic surgical system may allow surgeons to perform complex and difficult laparoscopic procedures more easily, effectively, and precisely.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic middle pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Middle pancreatectomy has been accepted as a valid surgical alternative to more extensive standard resections for the treatment of benign central pancreatic tumors. In this article, we describe a new minimally invasive approach to this procedure, using a robot-assisted laparoscopic technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From May 2004 to October 2005, 3 patients (2 female and 1 male), with a mean age of 52 years (range, 44-68), underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic middle pancreatectomies at the Department of General Surgery of Misericordia Hospital in Grosseto, Italy. Two of the patients had symptomatic serous cystadenomas, and 1 patient had a mucinous cystadenoma, which was discovered incidentally. The da Vinci((R)) Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) was used to perform the main steps of the intervention. All patients underwent a pancreaticogastrostomy for pancreaticoenteric reconstruction to the distal stump.

RESULTS

The mean operative time was 320 minutes (range, 270-380). Mean blood loss was 233 mL (range, 100-400). There were no mortalities. One patient developed a postoperative pancreatic fistula, which was managed conservatively. The postoperative hospital stay was 9 days for 2 patients and 27 days for the third patient. No endocrine or exocrine deficiencies were observed in the patients during a mean follow-up of 44 months (range, 38-48).

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted laparoscopic middle pancreatectomy presents an interesting, less-invasive option for resection of benign tumors of the neck and proximal body of the pancreas. In benign disease, it allows for the preservation of functional pancreatic parenchyma and, subsequently, reduced operative trauma.

Single-centre experience of laparoscopic pancreatic surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resection is regarded as safe and feasible in selected patients with benign pancreatic tumours. Few data exist on laparoscopic surgery for malignant lesions and larger neoplasms in unselected patients.

METHODS

The study included all patients admitted to Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, from March 1997 to March 2009 for surgery of lesions in the body and tail of the pancreas, and selected patients with lesions in the pancreatic head, who underwent surgery by a laparoscopic approach with curative intent.

RESULTS

A total of 166 patients had 170 operations, including 138 pancreatic resections, 18 explorations, nine resections of peripancreatic tissue and five other therapeutic procedures. Four patients had repeat procedures. There were 53 endocrine tumours (31.0 per cent), 28 pancreatic carcinomas (16.4 per cent), five cases of metastases (2.9 per cent), 48 cystic tumours (28.1 per cent) and 37 other lesions (21.6 per cent). The total morbidity rate was 16.5 per cent. Fistula was the most common complication (10.0 per cent). Three patients needed reoperation for complications. There were three hospital deaths (1.8 per cent). Median hospital stay following surgery was 4 days.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic resection of lesions in the body and tail of the pancreas in an unselected patient series was safe and feasible, and should be the method of choice for this patient group in specialized centres.

Laparoscopic surgery for pancreatic tumors

The rapid growth of minimally invasive technology and experience in recent decades has revolutionized many aspects of oncologic surgery. Adoption of laparoscopic pancreatectomy has been slow due to the inherent anatomic complexity of pancreatic surgery, as well as concerns of perioperative complications and compromised oncologic results. With increasing surgeon experience and growing data, laparoscopic pancreatic resection is generating considerable attention and enthusiasm. This article provides an overview of laparoscopic pancreatic tumor surgery with respect to tumor biology and technical approaches. Current applications of laparoscopic approaches to left pancreatectomy, tumor enucleation, central pancreatectomy, and pancreaticoduodenectomy for treatment of pancreatic tumors are considered in light of available evidence demonstrating feasibility, safety, and oncologic efficacy. Future directions in minimally invasive pancreatic surgery are explored.

Should all distal pancreatectomies be performed laparoscopically?

Despite the relatively slow start of laparoscopic pancreatectomy relative to other laparoscopic resections, an increasing number of these procedures are being performed around the world. Operations that were once considered impossible to perform laparoscopically, such as pancreaticoduodenectomy and central pancreatectomy are gaining momentum. Technology continues to improve, as does surgical experience and prowess. There are both enough experience and data (though retrospective) to confirm that LDP with or without spleen preservation appears to be a safe treatment for benign or noninvasive lesions of the pancreas. Based on the fact that LDP can be performed with similar or shorter operative times, blood loss, complication rates, and length of hospital stay than ODP, it can be recommended as the treatment of choice for benign and noninvasive lesions in experienced hands when clinically indicated. It is very difficult to make clear recommendations with regard to laparoscopic resection of malignant pancreatic tumors due to the lack of conclusive data. As long as margins are negative and lymph node clearance is within accepted standards, LDP appears to have no untoward oncologic effects on outcome. Certainly more data, preferably in the manner of a randomized clinical trial, are needed before additional recommendations can be made. Potential benefits of laparoscopic resection for cancer include the ability to inspect the abdomen and abort the procedure with minimal damage if occult metastases are identified. This does not delay the onset of palliative chemotherapy, which would be the primary treatment in that circumstance. In fact, there is evidence to suggest that there is a greater likelihood of receiving systemic therapy if a laparotomy is avoided in patients who have radiologically occult metastases. Patients may also undergo palliative laparoscopic gastric and biliary bypass if indicated. Faster wound healing may also translate into a shorter waiting time before initiating adjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy. If the patient develops a wound infection, the infection should be more readily manageable with smaller incisions. Although not proven clinically relevant in humans, the reduction in perioperative stress associated with laparoscopic resection may translate to a cancer benefit for some patients. One report compared markers of systemic inflammatory response in 15 subjects undergoing left pancreatectomy. Eight had hand-access laparoscopic procedures and the rest had standard open surgery. The subjects in the laparoscopic group had statistically lower C-reactive protein levels than the open group on postoperative days one (5.5 mg/dL versus 9.7 mg/dL, P = .006) and three (8.5 mg/dL versus 17.7 mg/dL, P = .003), suggesting that the laparoscopic approach to left pancreatectomy is associated with less inflammation. While this report is underpowered, it supports the notion that MIS cancer surgery may induce less of a systemic insult to the body than standard open cancer surgery. More work in this area is necessary before any firm conclusions can be drawn. An important issue to consider is that of training surgeons to perform these complex procedures laparoscopically. Not all pancreatectomies are amenable to the laparoscopic approach, even in the most skilled hands. As such, only a percentage of cases will be performed this way and expectations to educate surgeons adequately to perform advanced laparoscopic procedures can be unrealistic, resulting in more "on-the-job" training. Another aspect that draws some controversy is that of the totally laparoscopic procedure versus the hand-access approach. No laparoscopic instrument provides the tactile feedback possible to obtain with the hand. The HALS approach allows for this, and the opportunity to control bleeding during the procedure. HALS also provides a way to improve confidence during the learning-curve phase of these operations. Finally, it is important to remember that if the procedure is failing to progress laparoscopically, or if cancer surgery principles are likely to be violated, the surgeon (and the patient) must be willing to abort the laparoscopic approach and complete the operation using standard open technique. During the next few years we can expect to see more robust outcome data with laparoscopic pancreatectomy. The expectation is that more data will come to light demonstrating benefits of laparoscopic pancreatic resection as compared with open technique for selected patients. Several groups are considering randomized trials to look at these endpoints. Although more retrospective and prospectively maintained data will certainly be presented, it is less likely that randomized data specifically examining the question oflaparoscopic versus open pancreatectomy for cancer will mature, due to some of the limitations discussed above. Additional areas of discovery are in staple line reinforcement for left pancreatectomy and suturing technology for pancreatico-intestinal anastomosis. Robotic surgery may have a role in pancreatic surgery. Improving optics and visualization with flexible endoscopes with provide novel surgical views potentially improving the safety of laparoscopy. Another area in laparoscopic surgery that is gaining momentum is that of Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES). NOTES represents the "holy grail" of incisionless surgery. Can we enucleate a small tumor off the pancreatic body by passing an endoscope through the gastric (or colonic) wall, and bring the specimen out via the mouth or anus? Can we use this approach for formal left pancreatectomies? Pioneers have already developed a porcine model of left pancreatectomy. This technology must clear several hurdles before it is cancer ready; however, technology is moving at a rapid pace.

Parenchyma-sparing resections for pancreatic neoplasms

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

In recent years there has been an increase in the indications for pancreatic resection of benign or low-grade malignant lesions, especially in young patients with long life expectancy. In this setting, patients may benefit from parenchyma-sparing resections in order to decrease the risk of development of exocrine/endocrine insufficiency.

METHODS

A review of the literature and authors experience was undertaken.

RESULTS

Parenchyma-sparing resections of the pancreas including enucleation, middle pancreatectomy (MP) and middle-preserving pancreatectomy are described. Short and long-term outcomes after surgery are analyzed with special regard to postoperative morbidity/mortality, and oncological and functional long-term results.

CONCLUSIONS

Parenchyma-sparing resections are safe and effective procedures for treatment of benign and low-grade malignant neoplasms. Despite a significant postoperative morbidity they are associated with good long-term functional and oncological results. Enucleation should preferentially be performed laparoscopically whenever possible.

Laparoscopic versus open subtotal gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma: a case-control study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare technical feasibility and oncologic efficacy of totally laparoscopic versus open subtotal gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma is emerging in the West as a technique that may offer benefits for patients, although large-scale studies are lacking.

METHODS

This study was designed as a case-controlled study from a prospective gastric cancer database. Thirty consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma were compared with 30 patients undergoing open subtotal gastrectomy. Controls were matched for stage, age, and gender via a statistically generated selection of all gastrectomies performed during the same period of time. Patient demographics, tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage, histologic features, location of tumor, lymph node retrieval, recurrence, margins, and early and late postoperative complications were compared.

RESULTS

Tumor location and histology were similar between the two groups. Median operative time for the laparoscopic approach was 270 min (range 150-485 min) compared with median of 126 min (range 85-205 min) in the open group (p < 0.01). Hospital length of stay after laparoscopic gastrectomy was 5 days (range 2-26 days), compared with 7 days (range 5-30 days) in the open group (p = 0.01). Postoperative pain, as measured by number of days of IV narcotic use, was significantly lower for laparoscopic patients, with a median of 3 days (range 0-11 days) compared with 4 days (range 1-13 days) in the open group (p < 0.01). Postoperative early complications trended towards a decrease for laparoscopic versus open surgery patients (p = 0.07); however, there were significantly more late complications for the open group (p = 0.03). Short-term recurrence-free survival and margin status was similar between the two groups (p = not significant) with adequate lymph node retrieval in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma is comparable to the open approach with regard to oncologic principles of resection, with equivalent margin status and adequate lymph node retrieval, demonstrating technically feasibility and equivalent short-term recurrence-free survival. Additional benefits of decreased postoperative complications, decreased length of hospital stay, and decreased narcotic use make this a preferable approach for selected patients.

A novel laparoscopic approach to lesions related to the posterior aspect of the pancreatic head

The posterior aspect of the pancreatic head has proven to be a technically demanding region to approach laparoscopically. Previously, this region was approached through the gastrocolic ligament with the patient in a left semilateral position. We believe that this makes the laparoscopic approach to the posterior pancreatic head extremely difficult. In the technique presented here, which has been successfully used in 4 patients, the patient was in full left lateral position, and Nathanson retractors were used to retract the liver and right kidney. This allowed full exposure of the second part of the duodenum before any major dissection. The duodenum was then Kocherized, and the posterior aspect of the pancreatic head, along with the inferior vena cava, left renal vein, and aorta, was exposed. We describe here a safe and feasible laparoscopic method for access to and management of lesions related to the posterior aspect of the pancreatic head.

Laparoscopic pancreatic resection for cancer

Laparoscopic (lap) organ resection is now commonly performed for the management of solid tumors of the kidney, colon, adrenal glands and prostate. Surgeons have been slower to adopt minimally invasive approaches to the pancreas owing to operative complexity and complication potential. The majority of existing reports concerning lap pancreatectomy are single-center studies that describe experience with fewer than 20 cases. Only recently have larger experiences surfaced demonstrating the safety and efficacy of lap tumor enucleation and lap left pancreatectomy. As neoplastic disease is the most common indication for pancreatic resection, understanding the effects of the lap approach to pancreatectomy on cancer outcome is crucial. In addition to concerns of port-site tumor recurrence and tumor dissemination due to lap manipulation in the setting of pneumoperitoneum, adequacy of resection as defined by margin status and nodal assessment must be considered. This review covers the development and current state-of-the-art of lap pancreatic surgery for cancer. Existing data are reviewed for both open and lap pancreatic resections, with particular attention to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Projections of future advances in the field of lap pancreatic surgery are provided.

Totally laparoscopic Roux-en-Y duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy after middle pancreatectomy: a consecutive nine-case series at a single institution

OBJECTIVE

To present the results of a series of laparoscopic middle pancreatectomies with roux-en-Y duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Middle pancreatectomy makes it possible to preserve pancreatic parenchyma in the resection of lesions that traditionally have been treated by distal splenopancreatectomy or cephalic duodenopancreatectomy. The laparoscopic approach could minimize the invasiveness of the procedure and enhance the benefits of middle pancreatectomy.

METHODS

From March 2005 to October 2007, 9 consecutive patients with benign or low malignant potential lesions in the pancreatic neck or body underwent surgery. Laparoscopic middle pancreatectomy with a roux-en-Y duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy was planned on all of them. In the first 2 patients, the pancreas was transected by endostapler; in the last 7, the staple line was reinforced with absorbable polymer membrane.

RESULTS

The intervention was concluded laparoscopically in every case except 1 (laparoscopic-assisted) in which pancreaticojejunostomy was performed by means of minilaparotomy. Mortality was 0% and perioperative morbidity was 33%, (fistula of the cephalic stump in the first 2 patients (22%)). The pancreaticojejunostomy fistula rate was 0%. The median postoperative hospital stay was 5 days (range, 3-41). In the last 7 patients, in which pancreas was transected with staple line reinforcement material there were no stump fistulas; morbidity decreased to 14% and the median hospital stay was 4 days (range, 3-30).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic middle pancreatectomy is feasible and safe. Duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy can be performed safely using this approach. The method of pancreatic transection seems to be decisive in the incidence of cephalic stump fistulas.

Sporadically occurring functional pancreatic endocrine tumors: review of recent literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors are rare neoplasms often associated with a clinical syndrome. Their rarity makes a comprehensive study difficult at any single institution, while their uniqueness makes them desirable for investigation. This review summarizes recent information and advancements concerning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor diagnosis, imaging characteristics, treatment algorithms, and staging.

RECENT FINDINGS

Insulinomas and gastrinomas comprise the majority of functional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Advances in their identification and diagnostic evaluation, imaging techniques, and treatment algorithms are presented. Furthermore, a new staging classification system has been proposed which may significantly improve the ability to conduct future multi-institutional investigations on pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

SUMMARY

Although rare, a thorough understanding of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors is essential for all physicians due to the wide variety of symptoms with which patients present. Currently, patients are often misdiagnosed for extended periods of time. This review summarizes the recently published literature about diagnosis, imaging, treatment, and staging of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy: single institution experience of 6 patients

BACKGROUND

Medial pancreatectomy is an alternative technique for benign or low-grade malignant tumors of the neck of the pancreas. We describe our experience of laparoscopic central pancreatectomy.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective evaluation of laparoscopic pancreatic resection in the Department of Abdominal Surgery at Haut-Lévêque Hospital, CHU Bordeaux. From January 1999 until February 2006, 397 patients underwent pancreatic resection for pancreatic lesions, of whom 60 (15%) were enrolled for laparoscopic pancreatic resection. Of the 60 patients, 6 underwent laparoscopic central pancreatectomy. Surgical procedure, postoperative course, and follow-up data were collected.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy was successful in all patients. In 1 case, we had to perform a laparotomy to find the specimen, which had been lost in the cavity during the anastomosis. The median operative time was 225 minutes (range, 180 to 365 minutes). None of the patients required blood transfusion in the perioperative period, and there was no mortality. Symptomatic pancreatic fistula occurred in 2 patients (33%). None of the patients required reoperation or radiologic drainage. Oral feeding was resumed in a median of 11 days (range, 9 to 21 days). The median postoperative hospital stay was 18 days (range, 15 to 25 days). At a median follow-up of 15 months (range, 4 to 34 months), all patients were alive without exocrine or endocrine insufficiency.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy is feasible and safe. Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy may become the standard approach for resection of benign or low-grade malignant tumors of the neck of the pancreas if performed by highly skilled surgeons.

Laparoscopic pancreatic resection: the past, present, and future

Since the early 1990s, laparoscopic techniques have been applied to a growing number of pancreatic surgeries. Laparoscopic pancreatic resections have been performed in patients with a variety of diseases including chronic pancreatitis, pancreatic trauma, congenital hyperinsulinism, and neoplasms of the pancreas; e.g., insulinoma, mucinous cystic neoplasm, intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, etc. Laparoscopic pancreatic resections with an en bloc lymph node dissection have also been performed for invasive carcinomas. The long-term results after laparoscopic resections for invasive pancreatic cancer, however, are still not well defined. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies with or without spleen preservation may benefit patients with reduced postoperative pain, shorter hospital stay, a quicker recovery to normal activity, and better cosmetic appearances based on retrospective analyses of collective series and case reports. Prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to validate these benefits. In contrast, laparoscopic proximal pancreatectomies with or without duodenum preservation remain controversial. Although a laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and laparoscopic duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection are technically feasible, laparoscopic reconstruction after proximal pancreatectomies is not yet generally practicable but limited to personal experiences by highly skilled endoscopic surgeons. To justify the performance of laparoscopic proximal pancreatectomies, it is mandatory to demonstrate the potential clinical benefits and safety of these complicated procedures.

Minimally invasive treatment of pancreatic disease

Although open surgical procedures remain the standard for both benign and malignant diseases of the pancreas, in recent years a wide variety of surgical procedures performed on the pancreas have been completed laparoscopically. This article reviews the application of minimally invasive surgery to the management of both benign and malignant diseases of the pancreas.

Laparoscopy-assisted distal pancreatectomy with mobilization of the distal pancreas and the spleen outside the abdominal cavity

Laparoscopic ligation of the peripancreatic vessels or duct requires a particularly skillful technique. If the pancreatic tail and the spleen can be mobilized outside of the abdominal cavity, surgeons can perform these procedures as easily as ordinary open surgery. We developed a novel approach to laparoscopy-assisted distal pancreatectomy without hand-assist. In brief, the pancreatic tail and the spleen were mobilized laparoscopically from the retroperitoneum until the celiac axis was exposed, then the pancreatic tail and the spleen were laparoscopically mobilized outside the peritoneal cavity from a small incision at the upper abdomen. After mobilization, the distal pancreatectomy was performed as usual open method. This approach offers better results in coping with organs, which seem to be difficult to resect through laparoscopic surgery alone.

The Dagradi-Serio-Iacono operation central pancreatectomy

Central pancreatectomy (CP) is a segmental pancreatic resection indicated to remove benign or low-grade malignant tumors of the isthmus and proximal part of the body of the pancreas. The main advantage of this operation compared with major resections is that it permits to spare normal pancreatic parenchyma; moreover, spleen and upper digestive and biliary tracts are saved. The description of the complete operation was reported for the first time by Dagradi and Serio in 1984 and subsequently spread worldwide by Iacono and Serio. In our opinion, it should be called the Dagradi-Serio-Iacono operation, by the names of the surgeons who first performed it (Dagradi and Serio), and by the names of the surgeons responsible for reporting it worldwide with precise indications (Iacono and Serio). Operation requires a midline or a bilateral subcostal incision; the lesser sac is entered through dissection of the transverse colon from the omentum or by transecting the gastrocolic ligament. The pancreatic segment harboring the lesion is then mobilized and its posterior surface carefully dissected from the splenic vein and artery. Subsequently, the pancreatic portion harboring the tumor is isolated at its superior margin from the splenic artery after the pancreas is transacted. The extent of the resection of the central segment is limited on the right by the gastroduodenal artery and on the left by the need to leave at least 5 cm of normal pancreatic remnant. The resected pancreatic specimen is sent to the pathologist for confirmation of diagnosis and to check if the resection margins are adequate. Hemostasis of the two raw surfaces is achieved with interrupted 5 or 4/0 nonabsorbable stitches. When it is not stapled, the Wirsung's duct of the cephalic stump is sutured selectively with a figure-of-eight nonabsorbable stitch. An end-to-end invaginated pancreaticojejunostomy is carried out with a single layer of interrupted stitches. The operation is concluded with the construction of an end-to-side jejuno-jejunostomy about 50 cm distal to the pancreatic anastomosis. Other techniques for reconstruction of the distal stump using jejunum or stomach have been described. One or two soft drains are brought out on the right side. The fluid collected from this drain is checked for amylase level on postoperative days 3, 5, and 7; if the level is low or absent, the drain is removed. Central pancreatectomy is a safe technique for benign or low malignant tumors of the pancreatic neck that allows curing the tumor with evident functional results without increasing the risk for the patient. We can say that CP has a clear role like pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy and we think that a pancreatic surgeon has to include this procedure in his/her technical skills. In order to obtain excellent results, correct indications and experience in pancreatic surgery are recommended.