Initial experience with laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for left-sided pancreatic cancer in a single institution: technical aspects and oncological outcomes

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) for adenocarcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas - technical considerations with analysis of surgical outcomes

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to establish whether laparoscopic RAMPS (L-RAMPS) is a safe procedure with better oncological outcomes compared to laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) with splenectomy among patients with distal pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

This is a retrospective study performed on consecutive patients who underwent L-RAMPS and LDP with splenectomy for resectable or borderline resectable PDAC of the body and tail. In this paper, we presented our technique of laparoscopic RAMPS and analyzed intraoperative and perioperative complications, oncological efficacy, and long-term survival.

RESULTS

The study included 12 patients in the L-RAMPS group and 13 patients in the LDP with splenectomy. L-RAMPS was associated with significantly higher rates of R0 resection (91.7% vs. 69.2%, p = 0.027). There were no differences between the L-RAMPS and LDP with splenectomy groups in intraoperative blood loss (400 mL vs 400 mL, p = 0.783) and median operative time (250 min vs 220 min, p = 0.785). No differences were found in terms of perioperative complications, including the incidence of pancreatic fistula.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic RAMPS is a feasible and safe procedure. It provides higher radicality as compared with LDP with splenectomy, without increasing the risk of complications. Further studies are necessary to evaluate long-term outcomes.

Feasibility of laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) as a standard treatment for distal resectable pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic (Lap-) radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) is an attractive radical procedure that aims to achieve negative posterior retroperitoneal margin in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) resections. However, only few institutions are adapting Lap-RAMPS due to the technical difficulties and the lack of supporting evidence for the clinical applications.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed on consecutive patients who underwent RAMPS for distal resectable PDACs. We analyzed the short- and long-term outcomes including local control and the induction of adjuvant chemotherapy compared between Lap- and Open-RAMPS.

RESULTS

Of the 118 RAMPS patients, 43 patients underwent Lap-RAMPS and 75 patients underwent Open-RAMPS. The blood loss was lower (125 vs. 390 mL, p < 0.001), and postoperative hospital stay was shorter (17 vs. 21 days, p = 0.018) in the Lap-RAMPS group. There was no difference in the postoperative complications and no mortality in both groups. R0 resection rate was 100.0% in the Lap-RAMPS and 90.7% in the Open-RAMPS (p = 0.039). Among the patients eligible for adjuvant chemotherapy, the Lap-RAMPS group showed a favorable induction rate (100.0 vs. 89.6%, p = 0.037). Both groups showed a favorable 3-year local recurrence rate (8.7 vs. 10.0%, p = 0.976) and 3-year overall survival (69.8 vs. 71.1%, p = 0.996).

CONCLUSIONS

The safety and efficacy of Lap-RAMPS were comparable to those of Open-RAMPS in terms of achieving local control and adjuvant chemotherapy induction. A higher early induction of adjuvant chemotherapy is an advantage of minimally invasive surgery.

Complications in Distal Pancreatectomy versus Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy: A Disease Risk Score Analysis Utilizing National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Data

INTRODUCTION

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) was developed to improve R0 resections and lymph node harvests versus distal pancreatectomy (DP) in pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC); relative complication rates are understudied.

METHODS

Patients undergoing distal pancreas resections from 2006 to 2020 were identified from our institutional NSQIP database, grouped by resection method, and evaluated for the following outcomes: postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), clinically relevant POPF (crPOPF), incisional surgical site infection (iSSI), organ space SSI (osSSI), and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3 (CD ≥ 3) complications using logistic regression. Patients were matched 1:1 based on disease risk score.

RESULTS

Two-hundred-thirty-six and 117 patients underwent DP and RAMPS, respectively. POPF, crPOPF, CD ≥ 3 complications, iSSI, and osSSIs occurred in 105 (30%), 43 (12%), 74 (21%), 34 (10%) and 52 (15%) patients, respectively. Disease risk score matching yielded 89 similar patients per group. On multivariable analysis, patients undergoing RAMPS were not significantly more likely to experience POPF (OR 0.69, P = 0.26), crPOPF (OR 0.41, P = 0.72), CD ≥ 3 complication (OR 0.78, P = 0.44), iSSI (OR 0.58, P = 0.27), or osSSI (OR 0.93, P = 0.86). Of patients with PDAC (n = 108) mean nodal harvest were 14.8 (SD 11.30) and 19.4 (SD 7.19) nodes for patients undergoing DP and RAMPS, respectively (P = 0.01). Six patients (20%) undergoing DP had positive margins versus 12 (15%) undergoing RAMPS (P = 0.56). At a median follow-up of 17 months, there was no difference in locoregional recurrence-free survival (P = 0.32) or overall survival (P = 0.92) on Kaplan-Meier analysis.

CONCLUSION

RAMPS does not result in increased complications compared to DP and routine use is encouraged in pancreatic malignancies.

Comparison of laparoscopic versus open radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for pancreatic cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (l-RAMPS) provides a new surgical approach for patients with pancreatic cancers of the body and tail. However, whether it can achieve comparable outcomes to the open RAMPS (o-RAMPS) remains an issue.

METHODS

To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of l-RAMPS, the studies in the databases of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library published before September 13, 2021 were searched and a meta-analysis was performed using the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline. The perioperative and oncological outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Five retrospective cohorts involving 189 patients were included for final pooled analysis. There were no significant differences in the patients' operation time, intra-abdominal bleeding rate, intra-abdominal infection rate, mild morbidity (Clavien-Dindo classification = 1), moderate to severe morbidity (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥2), overall morbidity, wound infection rate, pancreatic fistula rate, delayed gastric emptying rate, reoperation rate, length of hospital stay, postoperative mortality, R0 resection rate, and 2-year overall survival between the 2 approaches. Besides, l-RAMPS was associated with less blood loss (mean difference (MD) = -232.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -316.93 to -148.46, P < 0.00001) and shorter days until oral feeding (MD = -0.79, 95% CI = -1.35 to -0.22, P = 0.006). However, the pooled analysis also indicated a significantly fewer lymph nodes dissected (MD = -3.01, 95% CI = -5.59 to -0.43, P = 0.02) in l-RAMPS approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Although l-RAMPS provides similar outcomes associated with benefits of minimal invasiveness compared to o-RAMPS, it harvested significantly fewer lymph nodes which might have potentially negative influence on the patients' long-term survival. L-RAMPS is still in the infancy stage and further investigation is needed to verify its feasibility.

Precision vascular anatomy for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is increasingly performed worldwide; however, the surgical anatomy required to safely perform MIDP has not yet been fully considered. This review evaluated the literature concerning peripancreatic vascular anatomy, which is considered important to conduct safe MIDP.

METHODS

A database search of PubMed and Ichushi (Japanese) was conducted. Qualified studies investigating the anatomical variations of peripancreatic vessels related to MIDP were evaluated using SIGN methodology.

RESULTS

Of 701 articles yielded by our search strategy, 76 articles were assessed in this systematic review. The important vascular anatomy required to recognize MIDP included the pancreatic parenchymal coverage on the root and the running course of the splenic artery, branching patterns of the splenic artery, confluence positions of the left gastric vein and the inferior mesenteric vein, forms of pancreatic veins including the centro-inferior pancreatic vein, characteristics of the left renal vein, and collateral routes perfusing the spleen following Warshaw's technique. Very few articles evaluating the relationship between the anatomical variations and surgical outcomes of MIDP were found.

CONCLUSIONS

The precise knowledge of peripancreatic vessels is important to adequately complete MIDP. More detailed anatomic analyses and descriptions will benefit surgeons and their patients who are facing these operations.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) was introduced to improve the tangential resection margin rates and N1 node clearance following resection of malignancies of the pancreatic body and tail. Owing to its technical complexity, minimally invasive RAMPS (MI-RAMPS) has only been reported by a few centers worldwide. We performed this meta-analysis to compare both short- and long-term outcomes between open RAMPS (O-RAMPS) and minimally invasive RAMPS (MI-RAMPS).

METHODS

A systematic search of the electronic databases PubMed, Medline (via PubMed), Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science was performed to identify eligible studies published in the English language regardless of study design. The outcomes of interest were operation time, estimated blood loss, transfusion rates, overall complications, Grade B/C post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rates, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), length of stay (LOS), R0 resection rates, lymph node (LN) yield and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Five non-randomized studies comprising of a total 229 patients (89 MI-RAMPS, 140 O-RAMPS) were included for analysis. Intra-operative blood loss was observed to be significantly reduced in MI-RAMPS as compared to O-RAMPS (MD -256.16, P < 0.001), while LN yield was higher in O-RAMPS as compared to MI-RAMPS (MD -2.73, P = 0.02). There were no statistically significant differences observed for the other perioperative, oncologic and survival outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis provides early evidence to suggest that MI-RAMPS may produce comparable short- and long-term outcomes to O-RAMPS, when undertaken by appropriately skilled surgeons in well-selected patients. Further large-scale prospective studies are required to corroborate these findings.

A systematic scoping review of the initial experience with laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for pancreatic malignancy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (L-RAMPS) is a validated surgical approach for the surgical treatment of pancreatic malignancies of the body and tail of the pancreas. Open (O-) RAMPS is an established technique that offers oncological efficacy and acceptable post-operative outcomes when compared to standard distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic malignancies. This review aimed to determine the types of evidence available for L-RAMPS, and its selection criteria and reported outcomes, using systematic scoping review methodology.

METHODS

A systematic review of available literature was performed in September 2020. Data extracted included patient selection criteria, technical details, total number of L-RAMPS procedures performed, lymph nodes retrieved, resection margins, survival, LOS and complications.

RESULTS

Eight papers were eligible for inclusion, totalling 92 cases. There were no studies that directly compared O- to L-RAMPS. All reports were small retrospective cohorts with 3-30 patients. Selection criteria were reported in 4/8 studies and differed between studies. Technique descriptions were included in 6/8 studies. Studies reported a median of 5 (range 1-9) out of ten operative and clinical outcomes, including operative time median range 188-431 min, intraoperative blood loss median range 18-445 mL, R0 resection rate median range 91-100%, number of lymph nodes median range 11-43, and length of stay median range 12-20 days.

CONCLUSIONS

L-RAMPS is infrequently reported in the literature. There are currently no data to allow for direct comparison of O- and L-RAMPS. Reports of L-RAMPS have an acceptable oncological and safety profile. A standardised description of the operative technique and outcome reporting, as well as specific training initiatives may be beneficial to broaden the application of L-RAMPS.

Comparison of perioperative short-term outcomes and oncologic long-term outcomes between open and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Purpose

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is widely performed but its efficacy and safety are not established for malignant lesions. This study was aimed to compare outcomes of LDP and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

Methods

Patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy for PDAC between 2009 and 2017 were enrolled. The preoperative clinical stage was evaluated and propensity score matching (PSM) was performed using age, sex, The American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th clinical T stage, and other organ involvement.

Results

In 186 patients enrolled, 35 (18.8%) received LDP. The ODP group showed larger tumor size and frequent involvement of other organs in preoperative images. However, after PSM, these differences were balanced. R0 resection (90.5% vs. 94.3%, P = 0.730), harvested lymph nodes (14.3 vs. 12.6, P = 0.380) and pathologic T stage (P = 0.474) were comparable between ODP and LDP groups, respectively. LDP demonstrated shorter operation time, less postoperative pain, and shorter hospitalization (14.4 days vs. 11.1 days, P = 0.026). In terms of long-term oncologic outcomes, median overall survival (32 months vs. 28 months, P = 0.724) and disease-free survival (18 months vs. 19 months, P = 0.926) were comparable.

Conclusion

LDP demonstrated better short-term outcomes and comparable long-term outcomes compared with ODP. LDP is a safe and feasible procedure for PDAC.

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) versus conventional distal pancreatectomy for left-sided pancreatic cancer: findings of a multicenter, retrospective, propensity score matching study

PURPOSE

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) has been reported to achieve high rates of a negative margin and resected metastatic lymph nodes. However, many studies have used historical controls and the results remain controversial. We conducted this study to compare the surgical and long-term outcomes of RAMPS vs. conventional distal pancreatectomy (DP).

METHODS

The subjects of this multicenter retrospective study were 106 patients who underwent curative resection for left-sided pancreatic cancer between 2012 and 2017. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were compared using Kaplan-Meier estimates.

RESULTS

The RAMPS group had more advanced T (T3/T4) and N stages (N1/N2) and a larger tumor size than the conventional group (T stage, p = 0.04; N stage, p = 0.02; tumor size, p = 0.04). The RAMPS group had more harvested metastatic lymph nodes (p = 0.02). After propensity-score matching, 37 patients from each group were included in the final analysis. There was no significant difference in RFS (p = 0.463) or OS (p = 0.383) between the groups. Multivariate analyses revealed the completion of chemotherapy to be an independent factor for RFS and OS (both p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in the RFS or OS between RAMPS and conventional DP in this series. RAMPS may be an option for R0 resection of advanced tumors; however, postoperative chemotherapy has a greater influence than the surgical procedure on the prognosis of patients with pancreatic cancer.

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy: preliminary experience with 10 cases

BACKGROUND

The radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) which is a reasonable surgical approach for left-sided pancreatic cancer is emphasis on the complete resection of regional lymph nodes and tumor-free margin resection. Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (LRAMPS) has been rarely performed, with only 49 cases indexed on PubMed. In this study, we present our experience of LRAMPS.

METHODS

From December 2018 to February 2020, 10 patients underwent LRAMPS for pancreatic cancer at our department. The data of the patient demographics, intraoperative variables, postoperative hospital stay, morbidity, mortality, pathologic findings and follow-up were collected.

RESULTS

LRAMPS was performed successfully in all the patients. The median operative time was 235 min (range 212-270 min), with an EBL of 120 ml (range 100-200 ml). Postoperative complications occurred in 5 (50.0%) patients. Three patients developed a grade B pancreatic fistula. There was no postoperative 30-day mortality and reoperation. The median postoperative hospital stay was 14 days (range 9-24 days).The median count of retrieved lymph nodes was 15 (range 13-21), and four patients (40%) had malignant-positive lymph nodes. All cases achieved a negative tangential margin and R0 resection. Median follow-up time was 11 months (range 3-14 m). Two patients developed disease recurrence (pancreatic bed recurrence and liver metastasis) 9 months, 10 months after surgery, respectively. Others survived without tumor recurrence or metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

LRAMPS is technically safe and feasible procedure in well-selected patients with pancreatic cancer in the distal pancreas. The oncologically outcomes need to be further validated based on additional large-volume studies.

Laparoscopic Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy with Vascular Resection for Pancreatic Cancer: Tips and Tricks

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (L-RAMPS) with vascular resection for pancreatic cancer has been rarely reported in the literature. Several critical steps are required to achieve a safe radical resection under laparoscopy while respecting oncologic principles of radicality.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data on a consecutive series of patients undergoing radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) were retrospectively reviewed for the purpose of this study. Patients were divided into two groups based on the surgical approach and the need for vascular resection, and data were compared. The surgical technique is reported in detail focusing on the different modalities of vascular resection.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients (male/female ratio, 12/11; mean age, 73 years) underwent RAMPS between July 2014 and October 2018 at our institution. Of these, 17 had a laparoscopic approach and six a standard open approach. All patients in the open group underwent complex vascular reconstructions while four out of 17 (23.5%) underwent laparoscopic vascular resection. One patient in the laparoscopic approach required a vascular reconstruction with graft interposition, which combined the two approaches. There was no mortality, and the complication rate and the duration of surgery were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

L-RAMPS with vascular resection is feasible and safe in selected cases when performed by advanced pancreatic surgeons with experience in laparoscopic surgery.

Left-posterior approach for artery-first en bloc resection in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for left-sided pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

We describe a "left-posterior approach" in which the important steps in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) for left-sided pancreatic cancer are accomplished in the direction caudal and dorsal to the pancreas.

METHODS

The patients who underwent LDP with a left-posterior approach at our hospital from January 2016 to April 2020 were reviewed to evaluate the short-term postoperative outcomes. In LDP, we first dissected retroperitoneal tissues above the left renal vein and superior mesenteric artery, yielding the mobilization of the pancreatic body widely. Then, the splenic artery was divided behind the ventrally lifted pancreas as an artery-first approach. The regional lymphadenectomy was performed in an en bloc manner consecutively in the same operative field. The neck of the pancreas was transected with a linear stapler after mobilization of the spleen.

RESULTS

In nine patients (five men and four women) aged 76 years (range: 64-82 years), the operative time was 398 min (276-482 min) with the estimated blood loss of 40 ml (0-80 ml). No patients developed grade B/C pancreatic fistula or delayed gastric emptying. Postoperative complications classified as grade III in the Clavien-Dindo classification occurred in one patient (abdominal abscess). The pathology confirmed R0 resection in all patients who had pancreatic cancer (n = 5), IPMNs (n = 3), and high-grade pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN) (n = 1). The number of retrieved lymph nodes was 35 (11-49).

CONCLUSION

The procedure with a left-posterior approach is a rational surgical technique in LDP for left-sided pancreatic cancer.

Comparison of minimal invasive versus open radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a single center retrospective study

INTRODUCTION

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) was proposed a decade ago with the aim to achieve higher R0 tangential margin and radical N1 lymph node resection for left-sided pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC), which has been widely accepted worldwide at present. Laparoscopic RAMPS (Lap-RAMPS) has been attempted for PDAC during last several years, however, no outcomes evaluation by comparison between laparoscopic vs open RAMPS has been reported yet.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From August, 2012 to March, 2018, patients undergoing open or lap-RAMPS for the diagnosis of left-sided PDAC were reviewed from a prospective database. Patients excluded if they were related with combined organs or vessels resection, systematic metastasis as well as conversion from open RAMPS to lap RAMPS. The surgical and oncologic outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 48 PDAC patients were enrolled (25 underwent lap-RAMPS and 23 underwent open-RAMPS). There were no significant differences in demographic or perioperative morbidity. In the lap-RAMPS group, R0 transection margin and retroperitoneal margin were both achieved in 23 of 25 patients (92%). In the open RAMPS group, R0 transection margin was achieved in 21 of 23 patients (91.3%), R0 retroperitoneal margin was 22 of 23 patients (95.65%). There were no differences in pathological examinations. The number of lymph node (LN) retrieved between lap-RAMPS and open- RAMPS group was not significant difference (15.84 vs 18.22; P = 0.268). Median disease-free survival (DFS) was analogous in two groups (18.11 m vs 20.00 m, P = 0.999). Median overall survival (OS) was 24.53 m in lap-RAMPS group and 28.73 m in the open-RAMPS group (P = 0.633).

CONCLUSIONS

Lap-RAMPS is technically feasible, and has comparable long-term oncological outcome with open-RMAPS.

Minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the most lethal malignancy of the digestive organs. Although pancreatic resection is essential to radically cure this refractory disease, the multi-organ resection involved, as well as sequelae such as glucose tolerance insufficiency and severe complications impose a heavy burden on these patients. Since the late twentieth century, minimally invasive surgery has become more popular for the surgical management of digestive disease and pancreatic cancer. Minimally invasive pancreatic resection (MIPR), including pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy, is now a treatment option for pancreatic cancer. Some evidence suggests that MIPR for pancreatic cancer provides comparable oncological outcomes to open surgery, with some advantages in perioperative outcomes. However, as this evidence is retrospective, prospective investigations, including randomized controlled trials, are necessary. Because neoadjuvant therapy for resectable or borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer and conversion surgery for initially unresectable pancreatic cancer has become more common, the feasibility of MIPR after neoadjuvant therapy or as conversion surgery requires further assessment. It is expected that progress in surgical techniques and devices, as well as the standardization of surgical procedures and widespread educational programs will improve the outcomes of MIPR.

Laparoscopic Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy with Venous Tangential Resection: Focus on Periadventitial Dissection of the Superior Mesenteric Artery for Obtaining Negative Margin and a Safe Vascular Resection

BACKGROUND

Due to its technical complexity, laparoscopic (L-) radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) for left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has been described in a few series.1-4 In addition, splenomesenteric junction tumor involvement is considered a formal contraindication to L-RAMPS.

METHODS

The video shows posterior L-RAMPS with a left approach to the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) for a left-sided PDAC with suspected involvement of the splenomesenteric junction.

RESULTS

The patient was a 61-year-old woman affected by a cT3N0M0 pancreatic body PDAC. Following dissection of the superior mesenteric vein (SMV), proper/common hepatic artery, and gastroduodenal artery, the pancreatic neck is encircled and the celiac trunk (CT) skeletonized. The treitz ligament is opened, and the SMA is identified and dissected on its left anterior margin. Pancreatic mobilization en bloc with the Gerota fascia and left adrenal gland is followed by splenic artery transection and suprapancreatic lymphadenectomy completion. The mesopancreas is dissected from the right margin of the SMA and CT and the pancreas is transected. The portal vein and SMV are cross-clamped and a venous tangential resection/closure is performed. Cryostate histological examination of the venous and pancreatic stumps showed absence of tumor cells. Final pathology revealed a pT2N0(0+/42)R0G2 PDAC of the pancreatic body.

CONCLUSION

During L-RAMPS, periadvential SMA dissection through the left-anterior approach, specular to the right posterior SMA approach described for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy,5,6 has a primary role in maximizing the vascular surgical margin and, allowing for complete mobilization of the specimen before vein resection, may make a splenomesenteric junction tangential resection/closure easier and safer in case of tumor involvement of the splenomesenteric venous axis.

Laparoscopic versus open radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy with artery-first approach in pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

An artery-first approach for pancreatic cancer (PC) is challenging to perform laparoscopically and is mainly performed using an open approach. The aims of this study were to assess the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) with an artery-first approach (L-aRAMPS) as compared with open aRAMPS (O-aRAMPS) in resectable PC using matched-pair analysis.

METHODS

Artery-first approach is an early dissection of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) from behind the pancreas body as the first surgical step. Data on L-aRAMPS and O-aRAMPS, performed between July 2013 and November 2019, were collected retrospectively. Additionally, the spatial characteristics of the splenic artery were analyzed using computed tomography.

RESULTS

Thirty L-aRAMPS and 33 O-aRAMPS for resectable PC were included. After matching, 15 L-aRAMPS were compared with 15 O-aRAMPS. Median intraoperative blood loss and hospital stay were significantly improved in L-aRAMPS compared to O-aRAMPS (30 vs. 220 g, p < 0.001; 12 vs. 16 days, p = 0.049). The overall morbidity was similar in both study groups. The total number of lymph nodes dissected and those harvested from around the SMA and R0 resection was similar in both study groups. We classified the width of the cross section of the pancreas body into three equal parts: the upper, middle, and lower parts of the pancreas; 63% of the splenic artery origin was located in middle and lower parts of the pancreas body.

CONCLUSION

L-aRAMPS is technically safe and oncologically feasible to secure favorable surgical outcomes for resectable PC patients.

Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy for Left-Sided Pancreatic Cancer Using the "Caudo-Dorsal Artery First Approach"

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer (PC) has serious malignant potential, thus requiring complete resection and adequate regional lymphadenectomy with tumor-free margins.1,2 A standard laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) procedure for PC is not yet established due to lack of supportive evidence.3^-6 METHODS: In our hospital, we first administered neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for resectable PC. Considering the benefits offered by a laparoscopic magnified caudo-dorsal view, we devised and standardized an LDP procedure for PC, which we employed in five patients with left-sided resectable tumors. First, the retroperitoneum was incised between the proximal jejunum and the inferior mesenteric vein with the transverse colon pushed up ventrally and cranially and with the proximal jejunum moved to the right. Then, the left renal vein (LRV) could be easily identified at this site. The retroperitoneal tissue was dissected along the LRV, and the origin of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) also was identified just above the LRV easily. The left adrenal gland was removed to secure the dorsal margin, if needed. The retroperitoneal dissection was continued along the major anatomical landmarks, including the LRV, the left renal artery, the left kidney, and the crus of the diaphragm beside the origin of the SMA. Using the same operative field, lymphadenectomy around the SMA was performed before dividing the pancreas. We could safely and easily expose the left aspect of the SMA after dissecting the ligament of Treitz. The dissection around the SMA was performed toward the side of the arterial root that had already been exposed above the LRV. Thus, the most important difficult steps of LDP for PC, such as retroperitoneal dissection and lymphadenectomy around the SMA, were safely performed early in the operation with a good laparoscopic view.

RESULTS

The median operative time was 341 (range 288-354) minutes, and median blood loss was 150 (range 50-150) ml. An intraoperative transfusion was not required for any patient. Severe postoperative complications or mortality were absent. An R0 resection was achieved in all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

LDP using the "caudo-dorsal artery first approach" is safe and useful for performing a minimally invasive, curative resection for left-sided PC.

Dual-Incision Laparoscopic Spleen-Preserving Distal Pancreatectomy: Merits Compared to the Conventional Method

BACKGROUND

Herein, we assess the safety and feasibility of dual-incision laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (DILSPDP) through lateral approach with reduced trocars for benign and low-grade malignancy in pancreas tail. We compare DILSPDP with surgical outcomes of conventional laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP).

METHODS

Patients with benign pancreas tail mass that had been scheduled for LSPDP were selected to undergo DILSPDP. These patients had spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with the dissection in lateral-to-medial fashion using a multichannel trocar in the right lateral decubitus position of patient. We compared the demographics and operative outcomes of DILSPDP with those of conventional LSPDP which was performed with dissection in medial-to-lateral fashion using four or five trocars in supine position.

RESULTS

Twenty two cases of DILSPDP and 26 cases of conventional LSPDP were reviewed. There was no difference in terms of demographic features including diagnosis or tumor size, although the location of the tumor was fundamentally different between the two groups. Significantly shorter operative times and reduced blood loss were observed in DILSPDP group (p = 0.004 and 0.011, respectively) and the preservation of splenic vessels was more successful with DILSPDP than conventional surgery (95.5% vs. 65.4%, p = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

DILSPDP appears to be a feasible method of spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy for benign or low-malignancy of pancreas tail and is accompanied by advantages in terms of splenic vessel preservation and reduced parietal trauma.

Assessement of postoperative long-term survival quality and complications associated with radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy and distal pancreatectomy: a meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the perioperative complications and the long-term pancreatic survival outcomes in patients treated with radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) and distal pancreatectomy (DP).

METHOD

We performed a computer search on the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases to retrieve the RCT or clinical trials comparing RAMPS and DP published before July of 2018. The quality of the included trials was assessed according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria by two researchers independently. The RevMan 5.3 software was used to extract and analyze the data.

RESULT

A total of 5 retroprospective clinical trial articles comprising 285 patients were included in the study. The number of patients who underwent RAMPS were 135 and 150 for DP. There were significant differences (P < 0.05) in the operation time [WMD = - 63.93, 95% CI (- 68.86 ~ - 58.99), P<0.00001], and bleeding volume [WMD = - 184.62, 95% CI (- 211.88 ~ - 157.37), P<0.00001] between the two groups. However, no significant differences were observed between RAMPS and DP in terms of pancreatic fistula, postoperative complications, postoperative hospital stay, and mortality (P>0. 05). As for pathological examination, there were statistically significant differences between RAMPS and DP in the R0 resection rate [RR = 2.37, 95% CI (1.19 ~ 4.72), P = 0.01] and the number of lymph node excision [WMD = 7.08, 95% CI (4.59 ~ 9.58), P<0.000013]. The one-year overall survival rate was higher in RAMPS patients compared to DP patients [RR = 1.20, 95% CI (1.02 ~ 1.41), P = 0.02]. But there were no significant difference in postoperative recurrence [RR = 0.85, 95% CI (0.70 ~ 1.04), P = 0.13] between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

RAMPS is an effective procedure for clinical application. Nevertheless, large, multicenter prospective randomized controlled trias are required to validate these findings.

CONCLUSION

The RAMPS procedure was associated with good postoperative outcomes and overall survival, indicating that it is an effective procedure for clinical application. Large, multicenter prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to validate these findings.

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for left-sided pancreatic cancer using the ligament of Treitz approach

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (Lap-DP) for benign lesions or those with low malignant potential has been proven safe and effective, and its performance is now widespread [1-3]. Lap-DP for left-sided pancreatic cancer (PC) is also being increasingly performed. According to some reports, Lap-DP has superior short-term outcomes (blood loss, postoperative hospital stay) and comparable oncological outcomes and overall survival with those of open distal pancreatectomy (Op-DP) [4-6]. PC has highly malignant potential; thus, complete resection and sufficient regional lymphadenectomy with tumor-free margins are very important. Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) is an accepted standard Op-DP technique for PC and is reportedly useful for achieving R0 resection and radical lymphadenectomy [7-10]. However, laparoscopic RAMPS (Lap-RAMPS) is not yet popular because of its technical difficulty and lack of adequate evidence. Few reports have described the detailed surgical technique of Lap-RAMPS [11-13]. We employ Lap-RAMPS using the ligament of Treitz approach with the benefit of a laparoscopic view and herein describe the usability of this laparoscopic procedure with a video.

METHODS

Our indication for Lap-RAMPS is left-sided PC located ≥1 cm away from the origin of the splenic artery (SPA) without invasion of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA), celiac artery (CA), common hepatic artery (CHA), or portal vein (PV). We apply either anterior or posterior RAMPS to achieve tumor-free margins. Therefore, the left adrenal gland and the nerve plexus around the SMA and CA are resected depending on the extent of the cancer. Three patients underwent Lap-RAMPS for left-sided PC using the ligament of Treitz approach from April to December 2016. This video shows our Lap-RAMPS procedure performed in a 67-year-old man with pancreatic body cancer who was being followed up for autoimmune pancreatitis. The tumor was suspected to have invaded the SPA, splenic vein, and retroperitoneum but was not close to the SMA, CA, CHA, or PV. The patient was put in the supine position with his legs opened, and the operation was performed using five trocars. Early in the operation, we incised the retroperitoneum just beside the ligament of Treitz, and the inferior vena cava and left renal vein (LRV) were exposed with resection of Gerota's fascia under a good laparoscopic view. The left adrenal gland was resected in this case to obtain sufficient tumor-free margins. The origin of the SMA was easily identified above the LRV. The most posterior dissection was carried out early in the operation, making it easy and safe to determine the resected margin and enabling curative resection with sufficient regional lymphadenectomy. After division of the pancreas with a linear stapler, the lymph nodes around the SMA and CA were safely removed.

RESULTS

The operative time was 358 min, and the estimated blood loss was 1 ml. The postoperative course was uneventful, and the patient was discharged on postoperative day 10. Pathological examination revealed invasive ductal carcinoma (stage III, T3N1M0 according to the 7th edition of the Union for International Cancer Control system) with tumor-free margins. In all three patients, the median operative time and blood loss were 358 (328-451) min and minimal (minimal to 1 ml). One patient underwent anterior RAMPS and the other two patients, including the case mentioned above, underwent posterior RAMPS. One patient developed a grade B pancreatic fistula according to the International Study Group for Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF) classification, but he recovered promptly with conservative treatment. No life-threatening complications occurred. The median postoperative hospital stay was 14 (10-16) days.

CONCLUSIONS

Lap-RAMPS using the ligament of Treitz approach is feasible and extremely helpful in performing minimally invasive, curative resection for well-selected left-sided PC.