Distal pancreas surgery: outcome for 19 cases managed with a laparoscopic approach

Pancreatic resection in the era of laparoscopy: State of Art. A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Innovation in surgical devices and improvement in laparoscopic skills have gradually led to achieve more challenging surgical procedures. Among these demanding interventions is the pancreatic surgery that is seen as intraoperatively risky and with high postoperative morbi-mortality rate. In order to understand the complexity of laparoscopic pancreatic surgery, we performed a systematic review of literature.

DATA SOURCE

A systematic review of literature was performed regarding laparoscopic pancreatic resection.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic approach in pancreas resections has been extensively reported as safe and feasible regarding pancreaticoduodenectomy, distal pancreatectomy and pancreatic enucleation. Compared to open approach, no benefit in morbi-mortality has been demonstrated (except for laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy) and no controlled randomized trials have been reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic approach is not workable in all patients and patient selection is not standardized. Additionally, most optimistic reports considering laparoscopic approach are produced by tertiary centres. Currently, two tasks should be accomplished 1°) standardization of the laparoscopic pancreatic procedures 2°) comparative trials to assess endpoint benefits of laparoscopic pancreatic resection compared with open procedures.

Modified Hand-Sewn Closure With Retroperitoneal Tissue-covering Method Prevents Pancreatic Fistula in Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

In laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, the stapler transection of the pancreas remains the preferred method; however, pancreatic fistula continues to be a critical unsolved problem. The aim of this study was to compare complications associated with distal pancreatectomy, especially regarding the formation of pancreatic fistula, with particular attention to the stapler and hand-sewn closure technique.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between January 2004 and June 2012, 47 patients underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. These patient's pancreatic bodies were similar, and they were subjected to closure of the pancreatic stump either by stapler (Staple group, n=21) or by a modified hand-sewn technique (Sewn group, n=26), and were subsequently retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

The incidence of PF was significantly higher in the "Staple group" compared with the "Sewn group." Likewise, the amylase levels in the drainage fluid, were significantly higher in the "Staple group" compared with the "Sewn group." Patients in the Sewn group had shorter median hospital stay compared with those in the Sewn group (5 vs. 8 d, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The 2-layer hand-sewn technique is a simple method, and it significantly decreased the incidence of PF and hospital stay compared with the use of staples in laparoscopy.

Preservation of splenic vessels during laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy via lateral approach

Introduction

Preserving splenic vessels during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (SPDP-LA) is feasible and avoids unnecessary splenectomy.

Aim

To present our outcomes for this unique technique.

Material and methods

Between January 1998 and January 2012, 6 patients who underwent SPDP-LA for benign or low malignancy tumors in the pancreatic tail were included. Clinical characteristics as well as perioperative data were retrospectively recorded.

Results

All procedures were successful, with an average operative time of 184 min (range: 88–277 min) and average blood loss of 401.7 ml (range: 10–900 ml). The mean hospital stay was 7 days. Pancreatic fistula occurred in 2 patients but was then cured by external drainage. There was no mortality. Follow-ups were available for all patients.

Conclusions

Our experience was characterized by a lack of conversions and by acceptable rates of postoperative fistula and morbidity. The lateral approach showed beneficial results in patients without complications and short post-operative hospital stays.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for adenocarcinoma of the pancreas

Since the first report on laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) appeared in the 1990s, the procedure has been performed increasingly frequently to treat both benign and malignant lesions of the pancreas. Many earlier publications have shown LDP to be a good alternative to open distal pancreatectomy for benign lesions, although this has never been studied in a prospective, randomized manner. The evidence for the use of LDP to treat adenocarcinoma of the pancreas is not as well established. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the current evidence for LDP in cases of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. We conducted a review of English language publications reporting LDP results between 1990 and 2013. All studies reporting results in patients with histologically proven pancreatic adenocarcinoma were included. Thirty-nine publications were found and included in the results for a total of 309 cases of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (potential double publications were not eliminated). Most LDP procedures are performed in selected cases and generally involve smaller tumors than open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) procedures. Some of the papers report unselected cases and include procedures on larger tumors. The number of lymph nodes harvested using LDP is comparable to the number obtained with ODP, as is the frequency of R0 resections. Current data suggest that similar short term oncological results can be obtained using LDP as those obtained using ODP.

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy for insulinoma: experience of a single center

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy is gaining acceptance for the treatment of insulinomas of the pancreatic body and tail. The aim of this report is to evaluate the feasibility, safety and outcomes of this procedure in a retrospective series.

METHODS

From May 2004 to November 2013, 9 patients underwent laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy for benign insulinomas in our department. Tumors were single and sporadic in eight patients, while the remaining patient had insulinomas in the setting of multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1. Tumors were located by preoperative imaging in all cases. Laparoscopic ultrasound was always performed to guide the surgical procedure.

RESULTS

All the operations were carried out laparoscopically with a mean operative time of 110 min (range 90-210 min) and a mean blood loss of 50 ml (range 30-120 ml). One patient (11.1%) died on the 22nd post-operative day for massive intra-abdominal bleeding associated with pancreatitis of the stump. Two patients (22.2%) developed pancreatic fistula that healed conservatively. Mean postoperative hospital stay was 7.1 days (range 5-18 days). All alive patients were free from recurrence after a mean follow-up of 45 months (range 11-72 months).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy is safe and feasible for the management of benign insulinomas. Definition of the tumor with preoperative imaging and laparoscopic ultrasound is essential to achieve high cure rate with minimal conversion.

Successful interventional radiological management of postoperative complications of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

During the past decade, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has gained increasing acceptance in the surgical community as a viable treatment option for distal pancreatic lesions. However, the possible complication of post-LDP pancreatic leakage remains a challenge, because it may lead to a series of events resulting in intraperitoneal abscess formation, sepsis, pseudoaneurysm formation, and occasional fatal hemorrhage. Dealing with these complications is extremely difficult and not much experience has been reported to date. We report a case involving the aforementioned post-LDP complications successfully managed by interventional radiological techniques while avoiding reoperation. We conclude that these management options are attractive, safe and minimally invasive alternatives to standard protocols.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is as safe and feasible as open procedure: A meta-analysis

AIM: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) compared with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP).

METHODS: Meta-analysis was performed using the databases, including PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science and BIOSIS Previews. Articles should contain quantitative data of the comparison of LDP and ODP. Each article was reviewed by two authors. Indices of operative time, spleen-preserving rate, time to fluid intake, ratio of malignant tumors, postoperative hospital stay, incidence rate of pancreatic fistula and overall morbidity rate were analyzed.

RESULTS: Nine articles with 1341 patients who underwent pancreatectomy met the inclusion criteria. LDP was performed in 501 (37.4%) patients, while ODP was performed in 840 (62.6%) patients. There were significant differences in the operative time, time to fluid intake, postoperative hospital stay and spleen-preserving rate between LDP and ODP. There was no difference between the two groups in pancreatic fistula rate [random effects model, risk ratio (RR) 0.996 (0.663, 1.494), P = 0.983, I² = 28.4%] and overall morbidity rate [random effects model, RR 0.81 (0.596, 1.101), P = 0.178, I² = 55.6%].

CONCLUSION: LDP has the advantages of shorter hospital stay and operative time, more rapid recovery and higher spleen-preserving rate as compared with ODP.

Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review of comparative studies

INTRODUCTION

The laparoscopic approach to distal pancreatectomy (DP) for benign and malignant diseases appears to offer advantages and is replacing open surgery in some centers. This review examined the evidence from published data of comparative studies of laparoscopic versus open DP.

METHODS

The Medline and PubMed databases were searched and relevant English language publications were systematically retrieved. Data were pooled by two independent reviewers. The results shown represent mean.

RESULTS

Up to December 2010, 13 comparative studies of laparoscopic versus open DP were identified of which two were excluded, leaving 503 and 588 patients respectively for analysis. The conversion rate was 9.5%. The groups were comparable for age and sex, whilst open surgery was associated with significantly higher incidence of malignant pathology (20.1 vs. 15.0%) and larger tumors (3.9 vs. 3.5 cm) compared with laparoscopic surgery. There were no differences between the two approaches with regard to the operative time (220 vs. 208 min), rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (16.1 vs. 19.5%), and mortality (0.6 vs. 0.5%). However, the laparoscopic approach was associated with significantly lower operative blood loss (237 vs. 562 ml), higher spleen preservation rate (37.8 vs. 8%), lower morbidity (30.5 vs. 38.4%), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (9.1 vs. 14.7 days).

CONCLUSIONS

The laparoscopic approach to DP offers advantages over open surgery with lower operative morbidity, higher spleen preservation rate, and shorter hospital stay; these benefits are particularly observed in patients with benign disease and borderline malignancy. The experience with laparoscopic DP for malignant disease remains limited, and long-term follow-up data are required to clearly define this role.

Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a single-institution case-control study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic distal pancreatic surgery has gained popularity in the last decade. However, well-designed studies comparing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) are limited. We present a single-institution case-control study comparing outcomes of LDP to ODP.

METHODS

From a prospectively accruing database, 104 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic pathologies were eligible. Of these, 30 LDPs were matched with 30 ODPs using a 1:1 case-match design. Matching criteria were final histopathologic diagnosis and lesion size. Twelve LDPs were excluded from analysis because of lack of adequate ODP controls. In all cases, an attempt was made at conservation of the spleen.

RESULTS

There were more females in the LDP group (p = 0.001). Other clinicopathologic characteristics of the LDP and ODP groups such mean age (52.4 ± 17.2 vs. 59 ± 12.8, p = 0.104), prior history of upper abdominal surgery (6.7% vs. 20.0%, p = 0.254) or pancreatitis (13.3% vs. 10.0%, p = 1.000), histopathologic diagnosis (p = 1.000), lesion size on imaging (3.7 ± 2.7 vs. 4.4 ± 2.4 cm, p = 0.170), and histopathology (3.8 ± 2.3 vs. 4.3 ± 2.3, p = 0.386) were comparable. There were no significant differences in postoperative complication rates (50.0% vs. 43.3%, p = 0.604), major complication rates (20% vs. 20%, p = 0.829), grade B/C pancreatic fistula rates (16.7% vs. 13.3%, p = 0.717), or reoperation rates (3.3% vs. 6.7%, p = 1.000) between LDP and ODP groups, respectively. There was a significantly higher rate of splenic conservation in the LDP group (70% vs. 30%, p = 0.002). The intraoperative blood loss (294 ± 245 vs. 726 ± 709 ml, p < 0.001) and mean duration of hospitalization (8.7 ± 4.2 vs. 12.6 ± 8.7 days, p = 0.009) were significantly lower in the LDP group compared to the ODP group.

CONCLUSION

LDP is a safe and feasible option for distal pancreatic resections in experienced centers. The postoperative complication rate is comparable to that of ODP. LDP is associated with lower operative blood loss, higher rate of splenic conservation, and shorter duration of hospitalization. These encouraging results demand further validation in prospective randomized trials.

Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy: a UK experience and a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Advances in operative techniques and technology have facilitated laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) and laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD).

METHODS

All distal pancreatectomies were attempted laparoscopically, while selected patients underwent LPD. The literature was systematically reviewed.

RESULTS

Between 2002 and 2008, 21 patients underwent LDP (n=14) or LPD (n = 7). The mean operating time, blood loss, and hospital stay after LDP were 265 min, 262 ml, and 7.7 days, respectively, and after LPD they were 628 min, 350 ml, and 11.1 days, respectively. The conversion, morbidity, pancreatic fistula, readmission, reoperation, and mortality after LDP were 7.1, 35.7, 28.4, 28.4, 0, and 7.1% respectively, and after LPD they were 0, 28.6, 14.3, 28.6, 0, and 0% respectively. The literature review identified 987 LDP and 126 LPD. Most LDP were for benign disease (83.9%) while most LPD were for malignancy (91.5%). The mean operating time, morbidity, pancreatic fistula, mortality, and hospital stay after LDP were 221.5 min, 24.7%, 16.4%, 0.4%, and 7.7 days, respectively, and after LPD they were 448.3 min, 28.6%, 11.6%, 2.1%, and 16 days, respectively.

CONCLUSION

LDP, particularly for benign disease and low-grade malignancy, is increasingly becoming the gold standard approach in experienced hands. In selected patients, LPD is feasible and safe. Long-term follow-up data are needed.

Metaanalysis of trials comparing minimally invasive and open distal pancreatectomies

BACKGROUND

The current literature suggests that minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is associated with faster recovery and less morbidity than open surgery. However, most studies have been limited by a small sample size and a single-institution design. To overcome this problem, the first metaanalysis of studies comparing MIDP and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) has been performed.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify studies comparing MIDP and ODP. Perioperative outcomes (e.g., morbidity and mortality, pancreatic fistula rates, blood loss) constituted the study end points. Metaanalyses were performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

For the metaanalysis, 10 studies including 349 patients undergoing MIDP and 380 patients undergoing ODP were considered suitable. The patients in the two groups were similar with respect to age, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classification, and indication for surgery. The rate of conversion from full laparoscopy to hand-assisted procedure was 37%, and that from minimally invasive to open procedure was 11%. Patients undergoing MIDP had less blood loss, a shorter time to oral intake, and a shorter postoperative hospital stay. The mortality and reoperative rates did not differ between MIDP and ODP. The MIDP approach had fewer overall complications [odds ratio (OR), 0.49; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.27-0.89], major complications (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.34-0.96), surgical-site infections (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.19-0.53), and pancreatic fistulas (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.47-0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

The MIDP procedure is feasible, safe, and associated with less blood loss and overall complications, shorter time to oral intake, and shorter postoperative hospital stay. Furthermore, the minimally invasive approach reduces the rate of pancreatic leaks and surgical-site infections after ODP.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy offers shorter hospital stays with fewer complications

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is increasingly performed for lesions of the body and tail of the pancreas. The aim of this study was to investigate short-term outcomes after LDP compared to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) at a single, high-volume institution.

METHODS

We reviewed records of patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy (DP) and compared perioperative data between LDP and ODP. Continuous variables were compared using Student's t or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Categorical variables were compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

A total of 360 patients underwent DP. Beginning in 2001, 95 were attempted, and 71 were completed laparoscopically with a 25.3% conversion rate. Compared to ODP, LDP had similar rates of splenic preservation, pancreatic fistula, and mortality. LDP had lower blood loss (150 vs. 900 mL, p < 0.01), smaller tumor size (2.5 vs. 3.6 cm, p < 0.01), and shorter length of resected pancreas (7.7 vs. 10.0 cm, p < 0.01). LDP had fewer complications (28.2% vs. 43.8%, p = 0.02) as well as shorter hospital stays (5 vs. 6 days, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

LDP can be performed safely and effectively in patients with benign or low-grade malignant neoplasms of the distal pancreas. When feasible in selected patients, LDP offers fewer complications and shorter hospital stays.

Robotic distal splenopancreatectomy: bridging the gap between pancreatic and minimal access surgery

INTRODUCTION

Almost 10 years have passed since computer-aided, most commonly known as robotic surgery, has emerged gaining slowly but steadily its place within minimally invasive surgical procedures. Nevertheless, pancreatic surgeons only recently have started incorporating it into current practice.

METHODS

In this 'how I do it' article, we describe our method for robotic distal splenopancreatectomy, focusing on its technical advantages, as well as its drawbacks. Furthermore, we describe some pitfalls commonly encountered during the procedure and we propose ways to avoid them.

CONCLUSION

Pancreatic robotic-assisted surgery is offering many practical advantages over the "classic" laparoscopic approach. Even though a difficult procedure to master, it may have the potential to establish the concept of minimally invasive surgery in areas where it is nonexistent as in pancreatic surgery.

Preoperative endoscopic tattooing of pancreatic body and tail lesions decreases operative time for laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Precise and expedient localization of small pancreatic tumors during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy can be difficult owing to the decreased tactile ability of laparoscopy and the homogenous appearance of the surrounding retroperitoneal fat. Precise localization of the lesion is critical to achieving adequate margins of resection while preserving as much healthy pancreas as possible. The objective in this study was to determine the effect of endoscopic tattooing of the distal pancreas on operative time.

METHODS

We reviewed retrospectively 36 consecutive patients who had a laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy at our institution over a 4-year period (2006-2009). Ten patients underwent preoperative tattooing via an endoscopic transgastric technique using ultrasound guidance. The tattoo was performed using 2-4 cc of sterile purified carbon particles injected immediately proximal and anterior to the pancreatic lesion. Operative times were compared according to the presence of a tattoo.

RESULTS

The endoscopically placed tattoo was easily visible upon entering the lesser sac in all 10 patients at laparoscopy. Patients with a tattoo had a shorter operative time (median, 128.5 minutes; range, 53-180) compared with patients without a tattoo (median, 180 minutes; range, 120-240; P < .01). None of the tattoo group required repeat surgery, whereas 1 patient who was not tattooed required re-resection for a lesion missed in the initial specimen. There were no complications associated with the endoscopic ultrasound-guided tattoo.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tattooing of pancreas lesions before a laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is safe and is associated with decreased operative time compared with nontattooed patients. This technique can allow for quick and precise localization of the lesion, allowing for optimal preservation of pancreas parenchyma and demarcating an appropriate line of resection.

Systematic review of minimally invasive pancreatic resection

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic resection is associated with a significant morbidity. Efforts to reduce hospital stay and enhance recovery have seen the introduction of minimally invasive surgical techniques. This article reviews the current published literature on the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive surgery of the pancreas.

METHODS

An electronic search of the PubMed and Embase databases was performed from 1996 to May 2008 to identify all relevant publications; studies meeting predefined inclusion criteria were retrieved and analyzed using a standardized protocol. Data on the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive surgery of the pancreas were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 565 abstracts reviewed, 39 studies were identified as eligible for inclusion. There were 37 case series and two case control studies. Compared with open pancreatic surgery, minimally invasive pancreatic resection is similar in terms of morbidity and mortality. Blood loss and length of stay are decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic distal pancreatic resection and enucleation of insulinoma appear to be safe procedures with reduced hospital stay, though morbidity remains significant. The evidence for laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy is in its infancy, but the authors feel it is unlikely that many centers will achieve sufficient case load to make the introduction of minimally invasive resection feasible.

Systematic review of minimally invasive pancreatic resection

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic resection is associated with a significant morbidity. Efforts to reduce hospital stay and enhance recovery have seen the introduction of minimally invasive surgical techniques. This article reviews the current published literature on the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive surgery of the pancreas.

METHODS

An electronic search of the PubMed and Embase databases was performed from 1996 to May 2008 to identify all relevant publications; studies meeting predefined inclusion criteria were retrieved and analyzed using a standardized protocol. Data on the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive surgery of the pancreas were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 565 abstracts reviewed, 39 studies were identified as eligible for inclusion. There were 37 case series and two case control studies. Compared with open pancreatic surgery, minimally invasive pancreatic resection is similar in terms of morbidity and mortality. Blood loss and length of stay are decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic distal pancreatic resection and enucleation of insulinoma appear to be safe procedures with reduced hospital stay, though morbidity remains significant. The evidence for laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy is in its infancy, but the authors feel it is unlikely that many centers will achieve sufficient case load to make the introduction of minimally invasive resection feasible.

Clinical outcome of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Few studies have compared laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (Lap-DP) and open distal pancreatectomy (open-DP). The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcome of Lap-DP and compare it to that of open-DP.

METHODS

A total of 37 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy (Lap-DP, 21 patients; open-DP, 16 patients) between January 2000 and March 2007 were enrolled in this study. Prior to January 2004, open-DP was the standard procedure for patients with a lesion in the distal pancreas without invasive ductal cancer; thereafter, Lap-DP was also an approved procedure. All 16 open-DP procedures were performed prior to January 2004.

RESULTS

The operating times for the Lap-DP and open-DP patients were 308.4 +/- 124.6 and 281.5 +/- 83.3 min, respectively, and these were not significantly different (P = 0.4635). Blood loss for the Lap-DP group (249.0 +/- 239.8 ml) was significantly smaller than that for the open-DP group (714.1 +/- 650.4 ml) (P = 0.0055), and none of the patients in the Lap-DP group received transfusions. The frequency of complications for the Lap-DP and open-DP groups was 0 and 18.8%, respectively, which is not significantly different (P = 0.0784). The average hospital stay for the Lap-DP group was significantly shorter than that for the open-DP group (10.0 +/- 2.6 vs. 25.8 +/- 8.8 days; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

In pancreatic diseases, other than invasive ductal cancer, arising in the distal pancreas, Lap-DP might be a more feasible and safer than open-DP.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a retrospective review of 14 cases

Although the role of minimally invasive techniques in pancreatic surgery remains controversial, resection of the left pancreas for benign or endocrine lesions has been universally adopted as a routine technique over the last few years. This study was undertaken to assess feasibility and safety of minimal access resections of distal pancreas in benign, endocrine, and malignant diseases. Operative time, conversion rate, adequacy of dissection, respect for oncologic principles, morbidity rate, and short-term outcomes were analyzed. From the years 2002 to 2007, 14 patients affected by pancreatic neoplasm of body/tail region were approached by minimally invasive technique. Nine patients were affected by malignant neoplasms and distal splenopancreatectomy was successfully achieved by laparoscopy in 6. Five patients were affected by endocrine neoplasms; distal pancreatectomy with preservation of spleen and splenic vessels was achieved laparoscopically in 3, whereas 2 needed conversion to laparotomy. Four patients developed pancreatic leak after transection by linear cutting stapler plus oversewing, whereas no leak was observed within 30 days from surgery after transection by linear stapler with Seamguard reinforcement of the staple line (P<0.05 with Fisher exact test).

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with conservation of the splenic artery and vein: report of three cases

Between March 2003 and March 2007, three patients with benign pancreatic tumors underwent a planned laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with conservation of the splenic artery and vein. Four trocars were placed, and an endoscopic linear stapler was used to transect of the pancreas. The perioperative data and surgical outcomes were examined. This procedure was successfully completed in three patients. The mean operative time was 158.3 min, with mean blood loss of 14.7 ml. The postoperative pathological diagnoses included one insulinoma, one solid pseudopapillary tumor, and one intraductal papillary-mucinous adenoma. The mean size of the tumors was 29.3 mm. Oral intake was initiated on day 1.7, and the length of postoperative hospital stay was 8.7 days on average. No morbidity or mortality was observed. A laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with conservation of the splenic artery and vein is a safe and feasible treatment option without compromising the splenic function for benign or borderline malignant tumors in the distal pancreas.

Left-sided pancreatectomy: a multicenter comparison of laparoscopic and open approaches

OBJECTIVES

To compare perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic left-sided pancreatectomy (LLP) with traditional open left-sided pancreatectomy (OLP) in a multicenter experience.

SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND DATA

LLP is being performed more commonly with limited data comparing results with outcomes from OLP.

METHODS

Data from 8 centers were combined for all cases performed between 2002-2006. OLP and LLP cohorts were matched by age, American Society of Anesthesiologists, resected pancreas length, tumor size, and diagnosis. Multivariate analysis was performed using binary logistic regression.

RESULTS

Six hundred sixty-seven LPs were performed, with 159 (24%) attempted laparoscopically. Indications were solid lesion in 307 (46%), cystic in 295 (44%), and pancreatitis in 65 (10%) cases. Positive margins occurred in 51 (8%) cases, 335 (50%) had complications, and significant leaks occurred in 108 (16%). Conversion to OLP occurred in 20 (13%) of the LLPs. In the matched comparison, 200 OLPs were compared with 142 LLPs. There were no differences in positive margin rates (8% vs. 7%, P = 0.8), operative times (216 vs. 230 minutes, P = 0.3), or leak rates (18% vs. 11%, P = 0.1). LLP patients had lower average blood loss (357 vs. 588 mL, P < 0.01), fewer complications (40% vs. 57%, P < 0.01), and shorter hospital stays (5.9 vs. 9.0 days, P < 0.01). By MVA, LLP was an independent factor for shorter hospital stay (P < 0.01, odds ratio 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.19-0.56).

CONCLUSIONS

In selected patients, LLP is associated with less morbidity and shorter LOS than OLP. Pancreatic fistula rates are similar for OLP and LLP. LLP is appropriate for selected patients with left-sided pancreatic pathology.