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

Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy Techniques: A Contemporary Analysis Exploring Trends, Similarities, and Differences to Open Surgery

Limited contemporary data has compared similarities and differences between total laparoscopic (LDP), hand-assisted (HALDP), and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). This study aimed to examine similarities and differences in outcomes between these three approaches in a contemporary cohort. Methods: Patients undergoing elective LDP, HALDP, and ODP in the NSQIP dataset (2014−2019) were included. Descriptive statistics and multivariate regression analyses were employed to compare postoperative outcomes. Results: Among 5636 patients, 33.9% underwent LDP, 13.1% HALDP, and 52.9% ODP. Compared with the LDP approach, surgical site infections were more frequent in HALDP and ODP approaches (1.2% vs. 2.6% vs. 2.8%, respectively, p < 0.01). After adjustment, the LDP approach was associated with a significantly lower likelihood of surgical site infection (OR 0.25, p = 0.03) when compared to ODP. There was no difference in the likelihood of surgical site infection when HALDP was compared to ODP (OR 0.59, p = 0.40). Unadjusted operative times were similar between approaches (LDP = 192 min, HALDP = 193 min, ODP = 191 min, p = 0.59). After adjustment, the LDP approach had a longer operative time (+10.3 min, p = 0.04) compared to ODP. There was no difference in the adjusted operative time between HALDP and ODP approaches (+5.4 min, p = 0.80). Conclusions: Compared to ODP, LDP was associated with improved surgical site infection rates and slightly longer operative times. There was no difference in surgical site infection rates between ODP and HALDP. Surgeon comfort and experience should decide the operative approach, but it is important to discuss the differences between these approaches with patients.

Laparoscopic splenic vessel-preserving distal pancreatectomy after laparoscopic pylorus-preserving gastrectomy: A case report

A 77-year-old woman who had undergone laparoscopic pylorus-preserving gastrectomy for gastric cancer showed dilatation of the main pancreatic duct in the distal pancreas on ultrasonography during postoperative surveillance. Detailed examination revealed that she had a main-duct type intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm with high-risk stigmata. As invasive malignancy was not suggested, laparoscopic splenic vessel-preserving distal pancreatectomy was performed to preserve the remnant stomach. Although adhesions around the gastroduodenostomy and splenic artery were severe, the magnified laparoscopic view facilitated the identification of appropriate dissection layers, resulting in limited blood loss. The distal pancreas was successfully resected without sacrificing blood flow to the remnant stomach. The postoperative course was uneventful. The pathological diagnosis was low-grade intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm. Laparoscopic splenic vessel-preserving distal pancreatectomy for benign or low-grade malignant disease of the distal pancreas can be useful for preserving the remnant stomach in patients with a history of gastrectomy.

Indocyanine green fluorescence angiography-guided simultaneous laparoscopic distal gastrectomy and spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy for conserving the gastrosplenic ligament: A case report

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE

Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence angiography is being increasingly performed intraoperatively to detect restricted blood flow intraoperatively for the prevention of postoperative organ ischemia and anastomotic leakage. This is the first case report of simultaneous laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) and spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) involving ICG angiography use to avoid the remnant stomach ischemia.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 55-year-old man was diagnosed with early cancer of the stomach body and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreatic tail. We performed simultaneous LDG with D2 dissection and LSPDP to conserve the gastrosplenic ligament and preserve blood supply to the remnant stomach. Intraoperatively, blood flow to the remnant stomach was visualized using ICG fluorescence angiography, after which Roux-en-Y reconstruction was performed. There was no perioperative remnant stomach ischemia.

CLINICAL DISCUSSION

Despite the preserved splenic artery and vein, complete splenic infarction occurs after LSPDP possibly due to thrombus formation during surgical procedures. In this patient, we conserved the gastrosplenic ligament for the short gastric artery, which supplied blood to the remnant stomach; however, remnant stomach ischemia may occur. Therefore, we performed ICG fluorescence angiography during this operation to ensure that sufficient blood supply to the remnant stomach was maintained.

CONCLUSION

Our experience demonstrates that ICG angiography may be useful for the prevention of remnant stomach ischemia.

Synchronous gastric cancer and carcinoma in situ of the pancreas

Abnormal findings in the pancreatic duct without a mass may require serial pancreatic juice aspiration cytological examination. In cases of synchronous gastric cancer and stage 0 pancreatic cancer, spleen-preserving pancreatectomy may have advantage.