Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy or distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy?: Perioperative and patient-reported outcome analysis

Fate of small remnant pancreatic tail in splenic hilum after laparoscopic spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy: a retrospective study

Purpose

When performing laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP), sometimes, anatomically challenging patients are encountered, where the pancreatic tail is deep in the splenic hilum. The purpose of this study was to discuss the experience with the surgical technique of leaving the deep pancreatic tail of the splenic hilum in these patients.

Methods

Eleven patients who underwent LSPDP with remnant pancreatic tails between November 2019 and August 2021 at Samsung Medical Center in Seoul, Korea were included in the study. Their short-term postoperative outcomes were analyzed retrospectively.

Results

The mean operative time was 168.6 ± 26.0 minutes, the estimated blood loss was 172.7 ± 95.8 mL, and the postoperative length of stay was 6.1 ± 1.0 days. All 11 lesions were in the body or tail of the pancreas and included 2 intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms, 6 neuroendocrine tumors, 2 cystic neoplasms, and 1 patient with chronic pancreatitis. In 10 of the 11 patients, only the pancreatic tail was left inside the distal portion of the splenic hilum of the branching splenic vessel, and there was a collection of intraabdominal fluid, which was naturally resolved. One patient with a remnant pancreatic tail above the hilar vessels was readmitted due to a postoperative pancreatic fistula with fever and underwent internal drainage.

Conclusion

In spleen preservation, leaving a small pancreatic tail inside the splenic hilum is feasible and more beneficial to the patient than performing splenectomy in anatomically challenging patients.

Mapping global new-onset, worsening, and resolution of diabetes following partial pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Partial pancreatectomy, commonly used for chronic pancreatitis, or pancreatic lesions, has diverse impacts on endocrine and metabolism system. The study aims to determine the global prevalence of new-onset, worsening, and resolution of diabetes following partial pancreatectomy.

METHODS

The authors searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from inception to October, 2023. DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model with Logit transformation was used. Sensitivity analysis, meta-regression, and subgroup analysis were employed to investigate determinants of the prevalence of new-onset diabetes.

RESULTS

A total of 82 studies involving 13 257 patients were included. The overall prevalence of new-onset diabetes after partial pancreatectomy was 17.1%. Univariate meta-regression indicated that study size was the cause of heterogeneity. Multivariable analysis suggested that income of country or area had the highest predictor importance (49.7%). For subgroup analysis, the prevalence of new-onset diabetes varied from 7.6% (France, 95% CI: 4.3-13.0) to 38.0% (UK, 95% CI: 28.2-48.8, P <0.01) across different countries. Patients with surgical indications for chronic pancreatitis exhibited a higher prevalence (30.7%, 95% CI: 21.8-41.3) than those with pancreatic lesions (16.4%, 95% CI: 14.3-18.7, P <0.01). The type of surgical procedure also influenced the prevalence, with distal pancreatectomy having the highest prevalence (23.7%, 95% CI: 22.2-25.3, P <0.01). Moreover, the prevalence of worsening and resolution of preoperative diabetes was 41.1 and 25.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative diabetes has a relatively high prevalence in patients undergoing partial pancreatectomy, which calls for attention and dedicated action from primary care physicians, specialists, and health policy makers alike.

Outcomes after distal pancreatectomy with or without splenectomy for intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm: international multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

International guidelines on intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) recommend a formal oncological resection including splenectomy when distal pancreatectomy is indicated. This study aimed to compare oncological and surgical outcomes after distal pancreatectomy with or without splenectomy in patients with presumed IPMN.

METHODS

An international, retrospective cohort study was undertaken in 14 high-volume centres from 7 countries including consecutive patients after distal pancreatectomy for IPMN (2005-2019). Patients were divided into spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) and distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS). The primary outcome was lymph node metastasis (LNM). Secondary outcomes were overall survival, duration of operation, blood loss, and secondary splenectomy.

RESULTS

Overall, 700 patients were included after distal pancreatectomy for IPMN; 123 underwent SPDP (17.6%) and 577 DPS (82.4%). The rate of malignancy was 29.6% (137 patients) and the overall rate of LNM 6.7% (47 patients). Patients with preoperative suspicion of malignancy had a LNM rate of 17.2% (23 of 134) versus 4.3% (23 of 539) among patients without suspected malignancy (P < 0.001). Overall, SPDP was associated with a shorter operating time (median 180 versus 226 min; P = 0.001), less blood loss (100 versus 336 ml; P = 0.001), and shorter hospital stay (5 versus 8 days; P < 0.001). No significant difference in overall survival was observed between SPDP and DPS for IPMN after correction for prognostic factors (HR 0.50, 95% c.i. 0.22 to 1.18; P = 0.504).

CONCLUSION

This international cohort study found LNM in 6.7% of patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy for IPMN. In patients without preoperative suspicion of malignancy, SPDP seemed oncologically safe and was associated with improved short-term outcomes compared with DPS.

Recent trends in organ-preserving pancreatectomy: Its problems and clinical advantages compared with other standard pancreatectomies

In this review article, we focus on recent papers on organ-preserving pancreatectomy procedures published since 2010. When comparing central pancreatectomy (CP) and distal pancreatectomy (DP), most studies have concluded that the CP group exhibited significantly lower incidence of new-onset diabetes or diabetes exacerbation than the DP group postoperatively. However, because of increased incidence of morbidities such as pancreatic fistula, the surgeon faces a considerable trade-off between increased short-term morbidity and long-term preservation of endocrine function. When the outcomes of two types of spleen-preserving DP (Kimura and Warshaw procedures) are compared, most studies mentioned the low incidence of postoperative gastric varices and splenic infarction with the Kimura procedure. Although there are several reports regarding the effect of spleen preservation on prevention of postoperative infections, no report on the contribution of spleen preservation to the prevention of overwhelming post-splenectomy infection is seen. The advantages of duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (DPPHR) concerning endocrine and exocrine functions continue to be subjects of discussion, mainly due to the limited number of institutions that have adopted this approach; however, DPPHR should be presented as an option for patients due to its low incidence of postoperative cholangitis. Organ-preserving pancreatectomy requires meticulous surgical techniques, and postoperative complications may increase with this surgery compared with standard pancreatectomy, which may be influenced by the surgeon's skill and the surgical facility where the procedure is performed. Nonetheless, this technique has significant long-term advantages in terms of endocrine and exocrine functions and its wider adoption in the future is expected.

Splenectomy and tumor size are risk factors for serious perioperative morbidity of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies

<b><br>Introduction:</b> The determinants influencing the risk for complications of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies (LDP) are not yet fully defined, thus we aimed to determine risk factors for serious perioperative morbidity after LDP with spleen preservation, LDP and radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for adenocarcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas (RAMPS).</br> <b><br>Material and methods:</b> Retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients that underwent LDP between January 2019 and December 2022. The study group included cases of serious perioperative morbidity (III-V grades in Clavien-Dindo classification) during a 30-day period after operation. The control group consisted of patients without serious perioperative morbidity. As many as 142 patients were included in the study.</br> <b><br>Results:</b> Serious perioperative morbidity was found in 33 (23.24%) operated patients, while mortality in 3 cases (2.11%). Serious perioperative morbidity after LDP with spleen preservation was found in 9/68 (13.2%) patients (27.3% of the perioperative morbidity group). Thirteen out of 51 patients, i.e. 25.5%, after LDP with splenectomy were included in the perioperative morbidity group (39.4%). Serious perioperative morbidity after RAMPS was found in 11/23 (47.8%) patients (33.3% of the perioperative morbidity group). In multivariate logistic regression, the need for splenectomy during pancreatectomy (OR 3.66, 95%CI 1.20-11.18) and tumor above 28 millimeters in size (OR 3.01, 95%CI 1.19-9.59) were independent risk factors for serious perioperative morbidity.</br> <b><br>Conclusions:</b> The need for splenectomy during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and tumor size above 28 millimeters were independent risk factors for serious perioperative morbidity after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies.</br>.

Short-term Outcomes After Spleen-preserving Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy With or Without Preservation of Splenic Vessels: A Pan-European Retrospective Study in High-volume Centers

OBJECTIVE

To compare short-term clinical outcomes after Kimura and Warshaw MIDP.

BACKGROUND

Spleen preservation during distal pancreatectomy can be achieved by either preservation (Kimura) or resection (Warshaw) of the splenic vessels. Multicenter studies reporting outcomes of Kimura and Warshaw spleen-preserving MIDP are scarce.

METHODS

Multicenter retrospective study including consecutive MIDP procedures intended to be spleen-preserving from 29 high-volume centers (≥15 distal pancreatectomies annually) in 8 European countries. Primary outcomes were secondary splenectomy for ischemia and major (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III) complications. Sensitivity analysis assessed the impact of excluding ("rescue") Warshaw procedures which were performed in centers that typically (>75%) performed Kimura MIDP.

RESULTS

Overall, 1095 patients after MIDP were included with successful splenic preservation in 878 patients (80%), including 634 Kimura and 244 Warshaw procedures. Rates of clinically relevant splenic ischemia (0.6% vs 1.6%, P = 0.127) and major complications (11.5% vs 14.4%, P = 0.308) did not differ significantly between Kimura and Warshaw MIDP, respectively. Mortality rates were higher after Warshaw MIDP (0.0% vs 1.2%, P = 0.023), and decreased in the sensitivity analysis (0.0% vs 0.6%, P = 0.052). Kimura MIDP was associated with longer operative time (202 vs 184 minutes, P = 0.033) and less blood loss (100 vs 150 mL, P < 0.001) as compared to Warshaw MIDP. Unplanned splenectomy was associated with a higher conversion rate (20.7% vs 5.0%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Kimura and Warshaw spleen-preserving MIDP provide equivalent short-term outcomes with low rates of secondary splenectomy and postoperative morbidity. Further analyses of long-term outcomes are needed.

Predictive Factors Associated with Complications after Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy

Although laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has become more popular, the postoperative complication rate remains high. We sought to identify the risk factors for post-LDP complications. We examined 1227 patients who underwent LDP between March 2005 and December 2015 at a single large-volume center. We used logistic regression for the analysis. The overall (13.2%) and major (3.3%) complication rates were determined. Postoperative pancreatic fistula was the most frequent complication, and 58 patients (4.7%) had clinically significant (grade B) pancreatic fistulas. No 90-day mortality was recorded. Long operative time (≥200 min), large estimated blood loss (≥320 mL), LDP performed by an inexperienced surgeon (<50 cases), and concomitant splenectomy were identified as risk factors for overall complications using a logistic regression model. For major complications, male sex (p = 0.020), long operative time (p = 0.005), and LDP performed by an inexperienced surgeon (p = 0.026) were significant predictive factors. Using logistic regression analysis, surgery-related factors, including long operative time and LDP performed by an inexperienced surgeon, were correlated with overall and major complications of LDP. As LDP is a technically challenging procedure, surgery-related variables emerged as the main risk factors for postoperative complications. Appropriate patient selection and sufficient surgeon experience may be essential to reduce the complications of LDP.

Postoperative risk of pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy with or without spleen preservation

INTRODUCTION

Outcomes after distal pancreatectomy with or without splenectomy are controversial. The present study aims to investigate differences in short-term and long-term outcomes between spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) and distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS).

METHODS

In this retrospective review of consecutive patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy with or without splenectomy from January 2011 until December 2017 for benign disease, the primary endpoint was to compare postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The secondary endpoint was to compare duration of surgery, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing SPDP had a lower rate of POPF (13.6% vs 46.1%; p = 0.02). Patients undergoing SPDP (n = 22) were discharged earlier than patients undergoing DPS (n = 26) (8 [4-29] vs 12 [6.48] days; p = 0.003). No differences in other intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were found between groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing SPDP developed fewer POPF and were discharged earlier compared to patients undergoing DPS.

Revisiting the potential advantage of robotic surgical system in spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy over conventional laparoscopic approach

Background

This study aimed to compare success rate of spleen preservation between robotic and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (DP).

Methods

Between November 2007 and March 2018, forty-one patients underwent the conventional laparoscopic DP (Lap group) and the other 37 patients underwent robotic DP (Robot group). The perioperative clinicopathologic variables were compared.

Results

The robotic procedure was chosen by younger patients compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery (42.9±14.0 vs. 51.3±14.6 years, P=0.016). The mean operation time was longer (313 vs. 246 min, P=0.000), but the mean tumor size was smaller in Robot group (2.7±1.2 vs. 4.2±3.3 cm, P=0.018). The overall spleen-preserving rate was higher in the Robot group (91.9% vs. 68.3%, P=0.012). However, with accumulating laparoscopic experiences (after 16th case), the statistical differences in spleen preservation rate between the Robot and Lap groups had diminished (P=0.428).

Conclusions

The present results suggest a robot can be helpful to save the spleen during DP for benign and borderline malignancy. However, a surgeon highly experienced in the laparoscopic approach can also produce a high success rate of spleen preservation, similar to that shown with the robotic approach.

Is Routine Splenectomy Justified for All Left-Sided Pancreatic Cancers? Histological Reappraisal of Splenic Hilar Lymphadenectomy

BACKGROUND

Although splenectomy is recommended during resection for left-sided resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) to perform lymphadenectomy of station 10 (splenic hilum), no level I evidence justifies this procedure. This study aims to evaluate the rate of lymph node (LN) and contiguous involvement of the splenic hilum in resectable distal PDAC.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent splenopancreatectomy for PDAC in the past 10 years. Station 10 LN were routinely isolated, and all corresponding microscopic slides were reinterpreted by a pathologist. The computed tomography (CT) results of patients with tumoral involvement of the spleen or splenic hilum by contiguity (TISOSH) and ≤ 10 mm between the tumor and spleen on pathology were blindly reviewed by two radiologists to evaluate CT for diagnosis of TISOSH.

RESULTS

We included 110 consecutive patients, including 104 with analyzable station 10 LN. The tumor was N+ in 58 (53%) patients. The median number of LN identified at station 10 was 2.0 ± 3.0. No station 10 LNs were detected in 42 (40%) patients. No patients had tumor-positive LN at station 10. TISOSH was found in nine (8%) patients, and was significantly associated with tail location (p = 0.001), tumor size (p = 0.005), and multivisceral involvement (p = 0.015). For diagnosis of TISOSH, the sensitivity and specificity of CT were respectively 89% and 95% for radiologist 1 and 89% and 100% for radiologist 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Splenic preservation during resection of distal PDAC may be an option in selected patients with body tumors and no suspected splenic or splenic hilum involvement on preoperative CT.

Impact of Spleen Preserving Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy on Postoperative Infectious Complications: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy is the standard procedure for body and tail pancreatic tumors. Technical difficulties arising from the strict anatomical relationship between pancreas and splenic vessels generally impose a concomitant splenectomy. Previous retrospective studies have shown a reduced risk of postoperative complications and infections in spleen preserved patients, but this is still a debated issue. Aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to provide a more robust evidence on the effect of spleen preserving laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were consulted. Pooled effect measures were calculated using an inverse-variance weighted or Mantel-Haenszel in random effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was evaluated using I²-index and Cochran Q-test.

RESULTS

Ten observational studies were eligible, and 632 patients were included in the quantitative analysis. Overall, 296 (46.8%) patients underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (Group S), and 336 (53.2%) patients underwent spleen-preserving laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (Group SP). In-hospital mortality was 0%. In the group S, the estimated pooled odds ratio of postoperative surgical site infection (SSI) and overall complications was 1.51 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-2.28; P = .048) and 2.30 (95% CI: 1.11-4.76; P = .024). The estimated pooled odds ratio of pancreatic fistula, postoperative bleeding, and reoperation was 1.64 (P = .094), 1.01 (P = .987), and 1.24 (P = .776), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Spleen-preserving laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy may reduce postoperative SSI and overall complications. These results should be interpreted with caution but seem meaningful to establish a better evidence-based treatment for distal pancreatic tumors. Further studies are warranted to analyze the role of spleen preserving laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy on long-term outcomes.

The treatment indication and optimal management of fluid collection after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Recently, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has become the standard procedure for resection of left-sided pancreatic tumors. Fluid collection (FC) at the resection margin of the pancreatic stump after LDP is a frequent radiological finding. However, there have been few treatment guidelines and the optimal management for this clinical finding is unclear. The aim of present study is to define the incidence of FC and suggest the optimal management for FC after LDP.

METHODS

A total of 1227 patients who underwent LDP between March 2005 and December 2015 were collected. FC was considered present when the longest diameter of the lesion on CT scan was > 3 cm.

RESULTS

A follow-up with at least two CT image was available for 1102 patients. Of these, 689 (62.5%) patients showed initial fluid collection (IFC) at the pancreas resection site in immediate postoperative CT. IFC (+) group had higher proportion of men, BMI, and higher rate of concomitant splenectomy than IFC (-) group. Among patients with FC after LDP, the treatment group had more frequent leukocytosis and accompanying symptoms than the observation group. Seventy-seven patients underwent therapeutic interventions for FC after LDP. Among them, 55 (71.4%) patients underwent endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastrocystostomy (EUS-GC). EUS-GC group had a higher success rate (85.6 vs. 63.6%, p < 0.033) and shorter hospital stay after the intervention (5.2 vs. 13.3 days, p < 0.001) than those who underwent other procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

High BMI, male, and concomitant splenectomy contribute to the occurrence of FC after LDP. In most cases, FC after LDP resolved spontaneously over time with observation. The patients with symptomatic FC ultimately required treatment. EUS-GC is the optimal intervention therapy for FC after LDP.

Distal pancreatectomy for benign and low grade malignant tumors: Short-term postoperative outcomes of spleen preservation-A systematic review and update meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The value of spleen preservation with distal pancreatectomy (DP) for benign and low grade malignant tumors remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term postoperative clinical outcomes in patients undergoing DP with splenectomy (DPS) or spleen preservation (SPDP).

METHODS

Online database search was performed (2000 to present); key bibliographies were reviewed. Studies comparing patients undergoing DP with either DPS or SPDP, and assessing postoperative complications were included.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis of included data showed SPDP patients had significantly less operative blood loss, shorter duration of hospitalization, lower incidence of fluid collection and abscess, lower incidence of postoperative splenic and portal vein thrombosis, and lower incidence of new onset postoperative diabetes. For the whole group, there was no difference in incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (RR = 0.95; 95%CI 0.65-1.40, P = 0.80), however, subgroup analysis of studies using ISGPF criteria showed that DPS patients had increased rates of Grade B/C POPF (RR = 1.35; 95%CI 1.08-1.70, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

SPDP for benign and low grade malignant tumors is associated with shorter hospital stay and decreased morbidity compared to DPS. J. Surg. Oncol. 2017;115:137-143. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Middle segment-preserving pancreatectomy for metachronous intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm after pancreatoduodenectomy: a case report

Total pancreatectomy has occasionally been performed to treat patients with multiple lesions (such as intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN)) or patients who have undergone repeated pancreatic resection. However, deficiencies of the exocrine and endocrine functions worsen patients’ quality of life. Recently, there have been several case reports citing middle segment-preserving pancreatectomy (MSPP) as a safe procedure and beneficial with respect to preservation of the exocrine and endocrine functions. We herein report the case of a patient who underwent MSPP for repeat pancreatectomy for IPMN and in whom a favorable outcome was achieved. The patient, a 70-year-old man, was diagnosed with branch duct-type IPMN (BD-IPMN) with worrisome features in the pancreatic head and a single cyst in the pancreatic tail, during a preoperative examination of early gastric cancer. Pancreatoduodenectomy was performed for BD-IPMN in the pancreatic head and gastric cancer. A histopathological examination showed an intraductal papillary mucinous adenoma (IPMA) with mild-moderate atypia. During the follow-up, the size of the cystic lesion in the pancreatic tail and the diameter of the main pancreatic duct were gradually increasing. Therefore, at 2 years and 6 months after surgery, distal pancreatectomy with preservation of the spleen (namely MSPP) was performed. The pancreatic resection margin was histologically negative. The length and volume of the remnant pancreas were approximately 6 cm and 10 ml, respectively. A histopathological examination showed an IPMA. The patient had no diarrhea or weight loss without digestive enzymes and maintained favorable glucose tolerance without oral hypoglycemic agents or insulin. He has showed no evidence of new lesions in the remnant pancreas at 3 years of follow-up after the last surgery.

Splenic preservation in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

Background

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) is designed principally for the removal of benign and low-grade malignant lesions in the left pancreas. The aims of this study were to compare LSPDP with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (LDPS), compare two splenic preservation techniques (splenic vessel preservation and Warshaw technique) and investigate factors that influence splenic preservation.

Methods

Information from patients who underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy between December 2004 and January 2016 at a single institution was reviewed. Data were extracted from a prospectively developed database. Intention-to-treat and propensity score matching analyses were employed. Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to investigate factors affecting splenic preservation.

Results

There were 206 patients in total (126 planned LSPDP and 80 planned LDPS procedures), of whom 108 underwent LSPDP and 98 LDPS. In intention-to-treat analysis, the duration of surgery was significantly shorter in the LSPDP group than in the LDPS group (mean 191·0 versus 220·5 min respectively; P &lt; 0·001). Tumour size was an independent risk factor for splenic vessel resection in planned splenic vessel preservation operations, and a cut-off value of 3 cm provided optimal diagnostic accuracy. After a median follow-up of 35·9 months, there were no clinically significant splenic infarctions and no patient developed gastrointestinal bleeding after LSPDP.

Conclusion

Planned LSPDP had a high splenic preservation rate and was associated with significantly shorter operating time than LDPS. Splenic vessel preservation could be predicted using a tumour cut-off size of 3 cm.

Splenic Preservation Versus Splenectomy During Distal Pancreatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies have been published comparing spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) with distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS), but the results remain inconsistent. The aim of this study was to compare SPDP with DPS by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Literature searches of the Medline/PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were performed to identify relevant studies published before April 30,2015. Perioperative outcomes of SPDP and DPS were evaluated. The meta-analysis was performed in random- or fixed-effects models, as appropriate. A subanalysis was conducted to compare the two techniques of splenic preservation: splenic vessel preservation (SVP) and Warshaw technique (WT).

RESULTS

Eighteen studies and 1156 patients were included in the comparison between SPDP and DPS. A total of 502 of these patients underwent SPDP and 654 underwent DPS. Meta-analysis showed the SPDP group had significantly fewer infectious complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.57, P = 0.006), less operative blood loss (P<0.0001), lower overall morbidity rate (OR 0.66, P = 0.002), and lower clinical pancreatic fistula rate (OR 0.42, P = 0.002) than the DPS group. Subanalysis indicated the SVP group had significantly lower rate of spleen infarction (OR 0.12, P<0.00001) and fewer secondary splenectomies (OR 0.13, P = 0.008) than the WT group.

CONCLUSIONS

SPDP was a safe procedure associated with better short-term outcomes than DPS. SVP could provide more sufficient blood perfusion for the conserved spleen than WT. However, the evidence is limited, and more randomized controlled trials are warranted.

Current research status of organ preserving pancreatectomy

Classic pancreatectomy procedures usually require resection of the pancreas and surrounding organs, having disadvantages of major trauma, long hospital stay and high morbidity. In order to preserve organ function as much as possible, many types of organ preserving pancreatectomy have been widely used in the treatment of benign pancreatic tumors and low-grade malignant lesions, including tumor enucleation, pylorus preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy, duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection, middle segmental pancreatectomy, and spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy. With the development of minimally invasive techniques in recent years, laparoscopic and robotic techniques have been also safely applied in organ preserving pancreatectomy. This article will review the current research status of organ preserving pancreatectomy.

Spleen-Preserving Versus Spleen-Sacrificing Distal Pancreatectomy in Laparoscopy and Open Method-Perioperative Outcome Analysis-14 Years Experience

We analyzed perioperative outcome of distal pancreatectomies with or without splenic preservation both in laparoscopic and open method to determine best approach. Retrospective data was collected from 1999 to 2013. We divided all distal pancreatectomies into four groups. Group 1-laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP). Group 2-laparoscopic splenectomy + distal pancreatectomy (LSDP). Group 3-open spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy. Group 4-open splenectomy + distal pancreatectomy. We recorded demographic data, intra and post operative complications, operative time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, pancreatic leak rate, and final pathology result. A total of 38 distal pancreatectomies were included. In group 1, patients were significantly younger (mean 29 vs 47 to 50 in other groups, p = 0.014). Tumor size (average 2.5 vs 5 to 9.5 cm in other groups, p = 0.023) and operative time (average 98 min vs 125 to 141 in other groups, p = 0.004) and hospital stay (average 6 vs 8 to 19 days in other groups, p = 0.009) in LSPDP were all significantly less than other groups taken together. However, intra-operative blood loss was equivalent. We further analyzed that between LSPDP and LSDP, age and tumor size were significantly less in LSPDP. Further we analyzed between spleen-preserving (groups 1 + 3) vs spleen-sacrificing (groups 2 + 4) distal pancreatectomies and between overall laparoscopic (groups 1 + 2) vs open (groups 3 + 4). Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy has all the advantages of minimal access surgery especially in small lesions and low-grade malignancy.