Comparison of central and extended left pancreatectomy for lesions of the pancreatic neck

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.

Quality of life after pancreatic surgery

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic surgery is challenging owing to the anatomical characteristics of the pancreas. Increasing attention has been paid to changes in quality of life (QOL) after pancreatic surgery.

AIM

To summarize and analyze current research results on QOL after pancreatic surgery.

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature available on PubMed and EMBASE was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Relevant studies were identified by screening the references of retrieved articles. Studies on patients' QOL after pancreatic surgery published after January 1, 2012, were included. These included prospective and retrospective studies on patients' QOL after several types of pancreatic surgeries. The results of these primary studies were summarized inductively.

RESULTS

A total of 45 articles were included in the study, of which 13 were related to pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), seven to duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (DPPHR), nine to distal pancreatectomy (DP), two to central pancreatectomy (CP), and 14 to total pancreatectomy (TP). Some studies showed that 3-6 months were needed for QOL recovery after PD, whereas others showed that 6-12 months was more accurate. Although TP and PD had similar influences on QOL, patients needed longer to recover to preoperative or baseline levels after TP. The QOL was better after DPPHR than PD. However, the superiority of the QOL between patients who underwent CP and PD remains controversial. The decrease in exocrine and endocrine functions postoperatively was the main factor affecting the QOL. Minimally invasive surgery could improve patients' QOL in the early stages after PD and DP; however, the long-term effect remains unclear.

CONCLUSION

The procedure among PD, DP, CP, and TP with a superior postoperative QOL is controversial. The long-term benefits of minimally invasive versus open surgeries remain unclear. Further prospective trials are warranted.

Short and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive central pancreatectomy: Comparison with minimally invasive spleen-preserving subtotal distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Central pancreatectomy(CP) is more complex surgery and higher complication rate than distal pancreatectomy(DP). However, with the development of minimally invasive surgery, CP has become a safer surgery technique. In this study, we compare minimally invasive CP(MI-CP) and Minimally invasive spleen-preserving subtotal DP(MI-SpSTDP) to figure out the short-term and long-term outcomes of MI-CP.

METHODS

From March 2007 to June 2020, 36 cases of MI-SpSTDP and 23 cases of MI-CP were performed for benign and borderline malignant pancreatic tumors in Severance hospital. The occurrence of postoperative pancreatic fistula(POPF) and Clavian-Dindo classification grade 3 or more in the two group was investigated, and the Controlling nutritional status scores(CONUT score) before and 1-year after surgery were compared to determine the long-term outcomes of exocrine function.

RESULTS

There was no difference in postoperative complications including POPF between the two groups(17.4% vs 5.1%, p = 0.294). And there were no statistical differences in either the MI-CP group (0.74 ± 0.75 vs. 0.78 ± 0.99, p = 0.803) or the MI-SpSTDP group (0.86 ± 0.83 to 0.61 ± 0.59, p = 0.071).

CONCLUSIONS

MI-CP had longer operation time and hospital stay and is safe and effective in preserving endocrine and exocrine functions in treatment of benign or borderline tumors located at the neck or proximal body of the pancreas.

Minimally invasive versus open central pancreatectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to give an overview on the postoperative outcome after a minimally invasive (ie, laparoscopic and robot-assisted) central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy with a specific emphasis on the postoperative pancreatic fistula. For benign and low-grade malignant lesions in the pancreatic neck and body, central pancreatectomy may be an alternative to distal pancreatectomy. Exocrine and endocrine insufficiency occur less often after central pancreatectomy, but the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula is higher.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed for studies on elective minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy, which reported on major morbidity and postoperative pancreatic fistula in PubMed, Cochrane Register, Embase, and Google Scholar until June 1, 2021. A review protocol was developed a priori and registered in PROSPERO as CRD42021259738. A meta-regression was performed by using a random effects model.

RESULTS

Overall, 41 studies were included involving 1,004 patients, consisting of 158 laparoscopic minimally invasive central pancreatectomies, 80 robot-assisted minimally invasive central pancreatectomies, and 766 open central pancreatectomies. The overall rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula was 14%, major morbidity 14%, and 30-day mortality 1%. The rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula (17% vs 24%, P = .194), major morbidity (17% vs 14%, P = .672), and new-onset diabetes (3% vs 6%, P = .353) did not differ significantly between minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy, respectively. Minimally invasive central pancreatectomy was associated with significantly fewer blood transfusions, less exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, and fewer readmissions compared with open central pancreatectomy. A meta-regression was performed with a random effects model between minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy and showed no significant difference for postoperative pancreatic fistula (random effects model 0.16 [0.10; 0.24] with P = .789), major morbidity (random effects model 0.20 [0.15; 0.25] with P = .410), and new-onset diabetes mellitus (random effects model 0.04 [0.02; 0.07] with P = .651).

CONCLUSION

In selected patients and in experienced hands, minimally invasive central pancreatectomy is a safe alternative to open central pancreatectomy for benign and low-grade malignant lesions of the neck and body. Ideally, further research should confirm this with the main focus on postoperative pancreatic fistula and endocrine and exocrine insufficiency.

Long-term Metabolic Morbidity and Steatohepatosis Following Standard Pancreatic Resections and Parenchyma-sparing, Local Extirpations for Benign Tumor: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess metabolic dysfunctions and steatohepatosis after standard and local pancreatic resections for benign and premalignant neoplasms.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Duodenopancreatectomy, hemipancreatectomy, and parenchyma-sparing, limited pancreatic resections are currently in use for nonmalignant tumors.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane libraries were searched for studies reporting measured data of metabolic functions following PD, pancreatic left resection (PLR), duodenum-sparing pancreatic head resection (DPPHR), pancreatic middle segment resection (PMSR), and tumor enucleation (TEN). Forty cohort studies comprising data of 2729 patients were eligible.

RESULTS

PD for benign tumor was associated in 46 of 327 patients (14.1%) with postoperative new onset of diabetes mellitus (pNODM) and in 109 of 243 patients (44.9%) with postoperative new onset of pancreatic exocrine insufficiency measured after a mean follow-up of 32 months. The meta-analysis displayed pNODM following PD in 32 of 204 patients (15.7%) and in 10 of 200 patients (5%) after DPPHR [P < 0.01; OR: 0.33; (95%-CI: 0.15-0.22)]. PEI was found in 77 of 174 patients following PD (44.3%) and in 7 of 104 patients (6.7%) following DPPHR (P < 0.01;OR: 0.15; 95%-CI: 0.07-0.32). pNODM following PLR was reported in 107 of 459 patients (23.3%) and following PMSR 23 of 412 patients (5.6%) (P < 0.01; OR: 0.20; 95%-CI: 0.12-0.32). Postoperative new onset of pancreatic exocrine insufficiency was found in 17% following PLR and in 8% following PMSR (P < 0.01). pNODM following PPPD and tumor enucleation was observed in 19.7% and 5.7% (P < 0.03) of patients, respectively. Following PD/PPPD, 145 of 608 patients (23.8%) developed a nonalcoholic fatty liver disease after a mean follow-up of 30.4 months. Steatohepatosis following DPPHR developed in 2 of 66 (3%) significantly lower than following PPPD (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Standard pancreatic resections for benign tumor carry a considerable high risk for a new onset of diabetes, pancreatic exocrine insufficiency and following PD for steatohepatosis. Parenchyma-sparing, local resections are associated with low grade metabolic dysfunctions.

Central Pancreatectomy for Central Pancreatic Lesions: A Single-Institution Experience

Background

Pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy are radical procedures for pancreatic lesions with high postoperative morbidity and mortality even in experienced hands. Central pancreatectomy is an alternative less radical procedure for centrally located pancreatic lesions that are benign or have a low malignant potential. It involves removing the central portion of the pancreas and has the advantage of preserving the pancreatic parenchyma, thereby decreasing the postoperative endocrine and exocrine insufficiencies.

Methods

We conducted a prospective study of six cases of central pancreatectomy in the Department of Surgical Gastroenterology and Liver Transplant, Government Stanley Medical College, India, between the years 2015 and 2019. All patients with lesions in the neck and proximal body of the pancreas were clinically and radiologically evaluated, and those with benign or borderline malignant lesions underwent central pancreatectomy by a standardized technique.

Results

The mean age of the patients was 27.8 years (range: 14 years - 37 years). Most of the patients were females (66.6%). The most common presenting symptom was abdominal pain, and the most common diagnosis was solid pseudopapillary neoplasm (83.3%). The mean diameter of the lesion was 6.1 cm. All patients underwent pancreaticojejunostomy of the distal stump. The median operative time and the blood loss were 310 minutes and 85 ml, respectively. Two patients developed biochemical postoperative pancreatic fistula, and in the long-term follow-up, none of them developed endocrine or exocrine insufficiency.

Conclusion

Central pancreatectomy is a safe and effective alternative for benign and low-grade lesions in the neck and body of the pancreas in which the head of the pancreas and a significant portion of the distal body and tail of the pancreas is uninvolved. Standardization of this pancreas-preserving procedure will result in better outcomes.

Surgical Management of Neuroendocrine Tumours of the Pancreas

Neuroendocrine tumours of the pancreas (pNET) are rare, accounting for 1-2% of all pancreatic neoplasms. They develop from pancreatic islet cells and cover a wide range of heterogeneous neoplasms. While most pNETs are sporadic, some are associated with genetic syndromes. Furthermore, some pNETs are 'functioning' when there is clinical hypersecretion of metabolically active peptides, whereas others are 'non-functioning'. pNET can be diagnosed at a localised stage or a more advanced stage, including regional or distant metastasis (in 50% of cases) mainly located in the liver. While surgical resection is the cornerstone of the curative treatment of those patients, pNET management requires a multidisciplinary discussion between the oncologist, radiologist, pathologist, and surgeon. However, the scarcity of pNET patients constrains centralised management in high-volume centres to provide the best patient-tailored approach. Nonetheless, no treatment should be initiated without precise diagnosis and staging. In this review, the steps from the essential comprehensive preoperative evaluation of the best surgical approach (open versus laparoscopic, standard versus sparing parenchymal pancreatectomy, lymphadenectomy) according to pNET staging are analysed. Strategies to enhance the short- and long-term benefit/risk ratio in these particular patients are discussed.

Overall Postoperative Morbidity and Pancreatic Fistula Are Relatively Higher after Central Pancreatectomy than Distal Pancreatic Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

To compare the intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of central pancreatectomy (CP) with distal pancreatectomy (DP).

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed on electronic databases from MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed from 1998 to 2018. Statistical analysis and meta-analysis were performed using statistics/data analysis (Stata®) software, version 12.0 (StataCorp LP, College Station, Texas 77845, USA). Dichotomous variables were analyzed by estimation of relative risk (RR) with a 95 percent (%) confidence interval (CI) and continuous variables were analyzed by standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% CI.

Results

Twenty-four studies with 593 CP and 1226 DP were included in the meta-analysis. CP had significantly longer operation time (SMD: 1.03; 95% CI 0.62 to 1.44; P < 0.001) and lengthier postoperative hospital stay (SMD: 0.63; 95% CI 0.20 to 1.05; P < 0.001) and lengthier postoperative hospital stay (SMD: 0.63; 95% CI 0.20 to 1.05; P < 0.001) and lengthier postoperative hospital stay (SMD: 0.63; 95% CI 0.20 to 1.05; P < 0.001) and lengthier postoperative hospital stay (SMD: 0.63; 95% CI 0.20 to 1.05; P < 0.001) and lengthier postoperative hospital stay (SMD: 0.63; 95% CI 0.20 to 1.05; P < 0.001) and lengthier postoperative hospital stay (SMD: 0.63; 95% CI 0.20 to 1.05; P < 0.001) and lengthier postoperative hospital stay (SMD: 0.63; 95% CI 0.20 to 1.05; P < 0.001) and lengthier postoperative hospital stay (SMD: 0.63; 95% CI 0.20 to 1.05; P < 0.001) and lengthier postoperative hospital stay (SMD: 0.63; 95% CI 0.20 to 1.05; P < 0.01). Estimated blood loss was significantly lower in CP (SMD: -0.34; 95% CI -0.58 to -0.09; P = 0.007). Overall postoperative morbidity (RR: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.13 to 1.50; P < 0.001), overall pancreatic fistula (RR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.20 to 1.66; P < 0.001), clinically relevant fistula (RR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.25 to 2.16; P < 0.001), and postoperative hemorrhage (RR: 1.90; 95% CI: 1.18 to 3.06; P < 0.05) were all significantly higher after CP. On long-term follow-up, DP patients were more likely to have postoperative exocrine (RR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.84; P < 0.05) and endocrine (RR: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.40; P < 0.001) insufficiency. There was no statistically significant difference in transfusion requirement, postoperative mortality, reoperation, and tumor recurrence.

Conclusion

CP is associated with significantly higher morbidity and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula. CP should only be reserved for selected patients who require postoperative pancreatic function preservation.

Landscape of Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Early-Stage Pancreatic Cancer Receiving Adjuvant or Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

Pancreatic resection is associated with postoperative morbidity and reduced quality of life (QoL). A systematic literature review was conducted to understand the patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) landscape in early-stage pancreatic cancer (PC).

METHODS

Databases/registries (through January 24, 2019) and conference abstracts (2014-2017) were searched. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale/Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Searches were for general (resectable PC, adjuvant/neoadjuvant, QoL) and supplemental studies (resectable PC, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire [QLQ] - Pancreatic Cancer [PAN26]).

RESULTS

Of 750 studies identified, 39 (general, 22; supplemental, 17) were eligible: 32 used QLQ Core 30 (C30) and/or QLQ-PAN26, and 15 used other PROMs. Baseline QLQ-C30 global health status/QoL scores in early-stage PC were similar to all-stage PC reference values but lower than all-stage-all-cancer values. The QoL declined after surgery, recovered to baseline in 3 to 6 months, and then generally stabilized. A minimally important difference (MID) of 10 was commonly used for QLQ-C30 but was not established for QLQ-PAN26.

CONCLUSIONS

In early-stage PC, QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PAN26 are the most commonly used PROMs. Baseline QLQ-C30 global health status/QoL scores suggested a high humanistic burden. Immediately after surgery, QoL declined but seemed stable over the longer term. The QLQ-C30 MID may elucidate the clinical impact of treatment on QoL; MID for QLQ-PAN26 needs to be established.

Surgical management of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: an introduction

Introduction: Neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas (pNETs) represent only 1% to 2% of all pancreatic neoplasms. These tumors can be classified as functional or nonfunctional tumors; as sporadic or from a genetic origin; as neuroendocrine neoplasms or carcinoma. Over the last decade, diagnosis of pNETs has increased significantly mainly due to the widespread use of cross-sectional imaging. Those tumors are usually associated with a good prognosis. Surgery, the only curative option for those patients, should always be discussed, ideally in a multidisciplinary team setting.Areas covered: We discuss i), the preoperative management of pNETs and the importance of accurate diagnosis, localization, grading and staging with computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, endoscopic ultrasound, and nuclear medicine imaging; ii), surgical indications and iii), the surgical approach (standard pancreatectomy vs pancreatic-sparing surgery).Expert opinion: The treatment option of all patients presenting with pNETs should be discussed in a multidisciplinary team setting with surgeon's experienced in both pancreatic surgery and neuroendocrine tumor management. A complete preoperative imaging assessment - morphological and functional - must be performed. Surgery is usually recommended for functional pNETs, nonfunctional pNETs >2 cm (nf-pNETs) or for symptomatic nf-pNETs.

Central versus Distal Pancreatectomy for Benign or Low-Grade Malignant Lesions in the Pancreatic Neck and Proximal Body

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes of central pancreatectomy (CP) with distal pancreatectomy (DP). PubMed, Web of Knowledge, and Ovid's database were searched for studies published in English language between January 1990 and December 2018. A meta-analysis was performed to compare the clinical outcomes of CP versus DP. Nineteen trials with 1440 patients were analyzed. Although there were no significant differences in the rate of intra-operative blood transfusion between two groups, CP costs more operative time as well as had more intraoperative blood loss than DP. Furthermore, the overall complication rate, pancreatic fistula rate, and the clinically significant pancreatic fistula rate were significantly higher in the CP group. On the other hand, CP had a lower risk of endocrine (odds ratio: 0.17; 95% confidence interval: 0.10, 0.29; P < 0.05) and exocrine insufficiency (odds ratio: 0.22; 95% confidence interval: 0.10, 0.48; P < 0.05). CP was associated with a higher pancreatic fistula rate, and it should be performed in selected patients who need preservation of the pancreas, which is of utmost importance.

Central pancreatectomy: a comprehensive, up-to-date meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Central pancreatectomy (CP) is the alternative to distal pancreatectomy (DP) for specific pathologies of the mid-pancreas. However, the benefits of CP over DP remain controversial. This study aims to compare the two procedures by conducting a meta-analysis of all published papers.

METHODS

A systematic search of original studies comparing CP vs. DP was performed using PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases up to June 2018. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) checklist was followed.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were included (596 patients with CP and 1070 patients with DP). Compared to DP, CP was associated with significantly higher rates of overall and severe morbidity (p < 0.0001), overall and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (p < 0.0001), postoperative hemorrhage (p = 0.02), but with significantly lower incidences of new-onset (p < 0.0001) and worsening diabetes mellitus (p = 0.004). Furthermore, significantly longer length of hospital stay (p < 0.0001) was observed for CP patients.

CONCLUSIONS

CP is superior to DP regarding the preservation of pancreatic functions, but at the expense of significantly higher complication rates and longer hospital stay. Proper selection of patients is of utmost importance to maximize the benefits and mitigate the risks of CP.

Pre- and intraoperative diagnostic requirements, benefits and risks of minimally invasive and robotic surgery for neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (PanNET) are rare tumours, accounting for 1%-2% of all pancreatic neoplasms. These tumors are classified as functioning neuroendocrine tumours (F-PanNETs) or non-functioning (NF-PanNETs) depends on whether the tumour is associated with clinical hormonal hypersecretion syndrome or not. In the last decades, diagnosis of PanNETs has increased significantly due to the widespread of cross-sectional imaging. Whenever possible, surgery is the cornerstone of PanNETs management and the only curative option for these patients. Indeed, after R0 resection, the 5-year overall survival rate is around 90-100% for low grade lesions but significantly drops after incomplete resections. Compared to standard resections, pancreatic sparing surgery, i.e. enucleation and central pancreatectomy, significantly decreased the risk of pancreatic insufficiency. It should be performed in patients with good general condition and normal pancreatic function to limit the operative risk and enhance the benefit of surgery. Nowadays, due to many known advantages of minimally invasive surgery, there is an ongoing trend towards laparoscopic and robotic pancreatic surgery. The aim of this study is to describe the pre- and intraoperative diagnostic requirements for the management of PanNETs and the benefits and risks of minimally invasive surgery including laparoscopic and robotic approach in view of the recent literature.

Clinical efficacy of middle pancreatectomy contrasts distal pancreatectomy: a single-institution experience and review of literature

Background

We aim to analyse the difference of clinical efficacy between middle pancreatectomy (MP) and distal pancreatectomy (DP).

Methods

A retrospective study was used to analyse 39 cases of MP and 52 cases of DP from the Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery of the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University from February 2007 to December 2016. Furthermore, we identify randomized controlled trials or strictly designed clinical controlled trials on MP and DP. We performed a meta‐analysis of the final included studies using RevMan 5.3 software to illustrate the differences in efficacy between MP and DP.

Results

In the MP group, the operation time and diet start time were significantly longer than DP group. However, there was no significant difference in serious complications including clinically significant pancreatic fistula (grades B and C), delayed gastric emptying, reoperative and mortality. Furthermore, compared with DP, patients in MP group could benefit from long‐term post‐operative exocrine and endocrine function. Finally, we performed a meta‐analysis including 14 studies with a total of 1104 patients and proved that the pancreatic fistula rate, endocrine and exocrine function were significantly different in the two groups.

Conclusion

The MP is a safe and feasible surgical method. It can well preserve the endocrine and exocrine function of pancreas and improve the life quality of patients.

The role of central pancreatectomy in pancreatic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes of central pancreatectomy (CP) with distal pancreatectomy (DP) and pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).

METHODS

A systematic literature research in PubMed/Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library was performed to identify articles reporting CP from January 1983 to November 2017.

RESULTS

Fifty studies with 1305 patients undergoing CP were identified. The overall morbidity, mortality, pancreatic fistula (PF) rate and reoperation rate was 51%, 0.5%, 35% and 4% respectively. Endocrine and exocrine insufficiency were occurred in 4% and 5% of patients after CP. Meta-analysis of CP versus DP favored CP with regard to less blood loss (WMD = -143.4, P = 0.001), lower rates of endocrine (OR = 0.13, P < 0.001) and exocrine insufficiency (OR = 0.38, P < 0.001). CP was associated with higher morbidity and PF rate. In comparison with PD, CP had a lower risk of endocrine (OR = 0.14, P < 0.001) and exocrine insufficiency (OR = 0.14, P < 0.001), but a higher PF rate (OR = 1.6, P = 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

CP maintains pancreatic endocrine and exocrine function better than DP and PD, but is associated with a higher PF rate.

Is Central Pancreatectomy Truly Recommendable? A 9-Year Single-Center Experience

AIMS

To compare the short- and long-term outcomes in patients with pancreatic benign or borderline neoplasm who underwent central pancreatectomy (CP) and distal pancreatectomy (DP).

METHODS

The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) single benign or low-grade malignant tumor; (2) tumor confined to the pancreatic neck or proximal body; and (3) tumor amenable to either CP or DP. Short and long-term outcomes, including complications, pancreatic exocrine and endocrine function, and quality of life (QoL) were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients who underwent CP and 26 patients who underwent DP were included. The median follow-up period was 53 months (range 21-117 months). Patients undergoing CP were significantly more likely to experience complications (68.7 vs. 23%, p = 0.003) especially grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula (62.5 vs. 23%, p = 0.011) than those undergoing DP. During the long-term follow-up, 2 patients in the DP group developed new-onset diabetes mellitus, but no patient in CP group developed this condition (8 vs. 0%, p = 0.382). Evidence of exocrine insufficiency, including severe diarrhea or steatorrhea, was not observed in either group. Both groups were equally satisfied with the overall health status and overall QoL.

CONCLUSION

CP is associated with excellent pancreatic function but a significantly increased postoperative morbidity and risk compared to DP. Therefore, the indication of CP should be chosen strictly.

Effect of end-to-side inverted mattress pancreaticojejunostomy following central pancreatectomy on the prevention of pancreatic fistula

Purpose

Central pancreatectomy (CP) may be indicated for the treatment of benign or low-grade malignant tumor in the neck and proximal body of the pancreas. Pancreatic fistula is one of the most common complications after CP. In this study, we suggested an inverted mattress pancreaticojejunostomy (IM-PJ) technique to decrease the risk of pancreatic fistula.

Methods

Between 2010 and 2015, CP was performed with IM-PJ for 10 consecutive patients with a benign or low-grade malignant tumor in the neck and proximal body of the pancreas. All clinical and pathological data were analyzed retrospectively.

Results

Median age was 56.4 years (range, 17–75 years). Median surgery duration was 286 minutes (range, 205–410 minutes). In all cases, the distal stump was reconstructed using the IM-PJ method. Median duration of hospital stay was 23.8 days (range, 9–53 days). No patient mortality occurred. Pancreatic fistula developed in 9 cases (90%); however, all fistulas were grade A and resolved without surgical or radiological intervention. Nine patients remain well with no recurrence or new endocrine or exocrine dysfunction.

Conclusion

Our results demonstrate that the outcomes of CP with IM-PJ are reasonable for prevention of pancreatic fistula following CP.

Robotic central pancreatectomy

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

Roux-en-Y pancreaticojejunostomy reconstruction after deep enucleation of benign or borderline pancreatic lesions: a single-institution experience

BACKGROUND

Standard pancreatectomy for benign and borderline pancreatic lesions involves resecting a substantial amount of normal pancreatic parenchyma and leads to a subsequent impairment of both exocrine and endocrine pancreatic functions. A limited resection such as enucleation is the preferred option for such neoplasms. However, enucleation is associated with a high risk of postoperative complications in some cases. This study evaluated the feasibility and outcomes of performing deep enucleation with Roux-en-Y pancreaticojejunostomy reconstruction.

METHODS

This study included patients who underwent pancreatic lesion enucleation from February 2010 to April 2014 in our hospital. The clinical data were collected and retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

This study examined 53 patients who underwent enucleation, 33 of the procedures included deep enucleation with Roux-en-Y pancreaticojejunostomy reconstruction. There was no mortality, and the morbidity rate was 66.7% in this group. No patients developed grade C pancreatic fistulas in both group. None of the patients developed tumor recurrence or exocrine or endocrine insufficiency at a median follow-up of 25 months.

DISCUSSION

Enucleation with Roux-en-Y pancreaticojejunostomy reconstruction is a safe and feasible procedure for the treatment of benign and borderline pancreatic neoplasms adjacent to the common pancreatic duct. This procedure can effectively mitigate the limitations of simple enucleation.

Limited surgery for benign tumours of the pancreas: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Limited surgical procedures for benign cystic neoplasms and endocrine tumours of the pancreas have the potential advantage of pancreatic tissue sparing compared to standard oncological resections.

METHODS

Searching PubMed/MedLine, Embase and Cochrane Library identified 86 full papers: 25 reporting on enucleation (EN), 38 on central pancreatectomy (CP) and 23 on duodenum-preserving total/partial pancreatic head resection (DPPHRt/p). The results are based on analysis of data of 838, 912 and 431 patients for EN, CP and DPPHRt/s, respectively.

RESULTS

The indication for EN for cystic neoplasms and neuro-endocrine tumours to EN was 20.5 and 73 %; for CP 62.9 and 31 %; and for DPPHRt/p 69.6 and 10.2%, respectively. The estimated mean tumour sizes were in EN-group 2.4 cm, in CP-group 2.9 cm and in DPPHRt/p-group 3.1 cm (DPPHRt/p vs EN, p = 0.035). Postoperative severe complications developed after EN, CP and DPPHRt/p in 9.6, 16.8 and 11.5% of patients; pancreatic fistula in 36.7, 35.2 and 20.1%; and reoperation was required in 4.7, 6.5 and 1.8 %, respectively. Hospital mortality after EN was 0.95 %; after CP 0.72%; and after DPPHRt/p 0.49%. Compared to EN and CP, DPPHRt/p exhibited significant lower frequency of reoperation (p = 0.029, p < 0.001) and lower rate of fistula (p < 0.001; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

EN, CP and DPPHRt/p applied for benign tumours are associated with low surgery-related early postoperative morbidity, a very low hospital mortality and the advantages of conservation of pancreatic functions. However, the level of evidence for EN and CP compared to standard oncological resections appears presently low. There is a high level of evidence from prospective controlled trials regarding the significant maintenance of exocrine and endocrine pancreatic functions after DPPHRt/p compared to pancreato-duodenectomy.

Parenchyma-sparing pancreatectomies for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

Parenchyma-sparing pancreatectomy, including enucleation and central pancreatectomy, has been investigated as an alternative to standard resection (pancreaticoduodenectomy or left/distal pancreatectomy) for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (PNET). In selected patients, with small (<2 cm) and low-grade tumors, PSP are associated with excellent both overall and disease-free survivals. These procedures are associated with an increased postoperative morbidity but an excellent long-term postoperative pancreatic function. Therefore, they should be considered as a valid therapeutic option in selected well-differentiated PNET.

Central Pancreatectomy as a Good Solution in Frantz Tumor Resection: A Case Report

Solid pseudopapillary tumors of the pancreas located in the head or body are a challenging clinical problem because they usually demand extensive surgical procedures, and in most reported cases pancreaticoduodenectomy is the operation of choice in such a location. An alternative method of surgery in precisely selected patients is a procedure known as central pancreatectomy. The authors present the case of a 13-year-old girl with a 5 cm tumor located in the body of the pancreas. The favorable anatomical location of the tumor suggested central pancreatic resection. The tumor was excised with 1 cm oncologic margins from both sides, and the distal remnant of the pancreas was protected with a Roux-en-Y loop. In the postoperative period the patient required reoperation because of intensive bleeding in the resection site but the duodenal loop was saved and the patient protected from biliary tract reconstruction and exocrine and endocrine insufficiency. Progress in pancreatic surgery, especially in children, allows less radical options for the reason that preservation of endocrine and exocrine function is very important and protects them, especially from insulin-dependent diabetes in the future.

Benign cystic neoplasm and endocrine tumours of the pancreas--when and how to operate--an overview

BACKGROUND

The recent evolution of limited local operative procedures for benign pancreatic lesions shifted surgical treatment options to the application of local techniques, although major resections of pancreatic head and left resection are still the standard.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the level of evidence of tumour enucleation (EN), pancreatic middle segment resection (PMSR) and duodenum preserving total/subtotal pancreatic head resection (DPPHRt/s), we focus based on present knowledge on indication to surgical treatment evaluating the questions, when and how to operate.

RESULTS

Tumour enucleation is recommended for all symptomatic neuro-endocrine tumours with size up to 2-3 cm and non-adherence to pancreatic main-ducts. EN has been applied predominantly in neuro-endocrine tumours and less frequently in cystic neoplasms. 20% of enucleation are performed as minimal invasive laparascopic procedure. Surgery related severe post-operative complications with the need of re-intervention are observed in about 11%, pancreatic fistula in 33%. The major advantage of EN are low procedure related early post-operative morbidity and a very low hospital mortality. PMSR is applied in two thirds for symptomatic cystic neoplasm and in one third for neuro-endocrine tumours. The high level of 33% pancreatic fistula and severe post-operative complications of 18% is related to management of proximal pancreatic stump. DPPHRt/s is used in 70% for symptomatic cystic neoplasms, for lesions with risk for malignancy and in less than 10% for neuro-endocrine tumours. DPPHRt with segment resection of peripapillary duodenum and intra-pancreatic common bile duct has been applied in one third of patients and in two thirds by complete preservation of duodenum and common bile duct. The level of evidence for EN and PMSR is low because of retrospective data evaluation and absence of RCT results. For DPPHR, 7 prospective, controlled studies underline the advantages compared to partial pancreaticoduodenectomy.

CONCLUSION

The application of tumour enucleation, pancreatic middle segment resection and duodenum preserving subtotal or total pancreatic head resection are associated with low level surgery related early post-operative complications and a very low hospital mortality. The major advantage of the limited procedures is preservation of exo- and endocrine pancreatic functions.

Pancreatic fistula after central pancreatectomy: case series and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fistula is one of the most common complications after pancreatectomy. This study aimed to assess the occurrence and severity of pancreatic fistula after central pancreatectomy.

METHODS

The medical records of 13 patients who had undergone central pancreatectomy were retrospectively studied, together with a literature review of studies including at least five cases of central pancreatectomy. Pancreatic fistula was defined and graded according to the recommendations of the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF).

RESULTS

No death was observed in the 13 patients. Pancreatic fistula developed in 7 patients and was successfully treated non-operatively. None of these patients required re-operation. A total of 40 studies involving 867 patients who underwent central pancreatectomy were reviewed. The overall pancreatic fistula rate of the patients was 33.4% (0-100%). Of 279 patients, 250 (89.6%) had grade A or B fistulae of ISGPF and were treated non-operatively, and the remaining 29 (10.4%) had grade C fistulae of ISGPF. In 194 patients, 15 (7.7%) were re-operated upon. Only one patient with grade C fistula of ISGPF died from multiple organ failure after re-operation.

CONCLUSION

Despite the relatively high occurrence, most pancreatic fistulae after central pancreatectomy are recognized a grade A or B fistula of ISGPF, which can be treated conservatively or by mini-invasive approaches.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Patients get more long-term benefit from central pancreatectomy than distal resection: a meta-analysis

AIMS

Central pancreatectomy (CP) protects more normal pancreatic parenchyma than distal pancreatectomy (DP), but the safety, feasibility and long-term benefit of CP are inconclusive. This meta-analysis aims to ascertain the relative merits of CP.

METHODS

A systematic literature research was performed to identify comparative studies on CP and DP. Perioperative and long-term outcomes constituted the end points. Pooled risk ratios (RR) and weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated using either fixed effects or random effects model.

RESULTS

Nine studies with 735 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Although CP cost more operative time than DP, the two groups had no significant differences in the volume of intraoperative blood loss, rate of intraoperative blood transfusion and length of postoperative hospital stay. According to the postoperative outcomes, although the CP group had higher overall complication rate (Fixed effects model; RR: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.05-1.62; P < 0.05) as well as overall pancreatic fistula rate (Fixed effects model; RR: 1.58; 95% CI: 1.20-2.08; P < 0.05), the two groups did not differ significantly in the fateful surgical complications such as clinically significant pancreatic fistula (Grades B and C), postoperative bleeding, reoperation and intra-abdominal effusion/abscess. Furthermore, the perioperative mortality rate was comparable between the two groups. During the follow-up period, the patients after DP were more likely to suffer pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (Fixed effects model; RR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.32-0.86; P < 0.05) and endocrine impairment (Fixed effects model; RR: 0.19; 95% CI: 0.11-0.33; P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

CP was still an acceptable and feasible procedure, especially when considering the postoperative pancreatic function preservation ability by CP.

Central pancreatectomy versus spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: a comparative analysis of early and late postoperative outcomes

BACKGROUND/AIM

The aim of the present study is to compare the postoperative and long-term outcomes of central pancreatectomy (CP) and spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP).

METHODS

Clinical, pathological and long-term data were compared between 22 patients who underwent CP and 25 patients who underwent SPDP (2002-2012).

RESULTS

The median length of resected pancreas was 8.5 cm in the SPDP group and 5 cm in the CP group (p < 0.001). The median estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the CP group (p = 0.019). Morbidity was 50% for CPs and 40% for SPDPs (p = 0.564). The rate of pancreatic fistulae was 36% for CPs and 40% for SPDPs (p = 0.530). The rate of new-onset diabetes was nil in the successful CP group and 16% in the SPDP group (p = 0.111).

CONCLUSION

Morbidity and pancreatic fistula rates are not higher after CP when compared to SPDP. The loss of normal pancreatic tissue is significantly lower for CP, and thus there is potentially better preservation of the pancreatic endocrine functions. CP should be considered only in selected cases when preservation of the pancreas is of utmost importance, especially for lesions situated at the level of the pancreatic neck.

Parenchyma-sparing resections for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

BACKGROUND

Parenchyma-sparing pancreatectomy (PSP), including enucleation and central pancreatectomy, has been investigated as an alternative to standard resection for pancreatic endocrine neoplasm, but the benefit/risk of these procedures remains little known.

METHODS

From 1998 to 2010, among 197 patients operated for well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, 67 underwent PSP (45 enucleations and 22 central pancreatectomies) and 66 standard resections (35 pancreaticoduodenectomies and 31 distal pancreatectomies) for a tumor below 4 cm, without synchronous distant metastasis. Groups were compared regarding postoperative morbidity, mortality, long-term pancreatic function, and survival calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Tumors operated by PSP had a median size of 15 mm, were mainly incidentally diagnosed (n = 46, 69 %), and nonfunctioning (n = 55, 82 %). Overall morbidity rate was higher after PSP than standard resection (SR) (76 vs 58 %, p = 0.0028), including more frequent pancreatic fistulas (69 vs 42 %, p = 0.003). Postoperative diabetes was less frequent following PSP than pancreaticoduodenectomy (5 vs 21 %; p = 0.022) but equivalent to the one observed after distal pancreatectomy (4 %, p = 1). Exocrine insufficiency was significantly less frequent after PSP than SR (3 vs 32 %; p < 0.0001). The overall and recurrence-free 5-year survival after PSP for nonfunctioning tumors was 96 and 98 %, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In selected patients, with small and low-grade tumors, PSP are associated with excellent overall and recurrence-free survivals. These procedures are associated with an increased postoperative morbidity but an excellent postoperative pancreatic function. Therefore, they should be considered as a valid therapeutic option in selected well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Laparoscopic pancreatectomy for malignancy

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

Robot-assisted laparoscopic middle pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Parenchyma-sparing pancreatectomies for benign or border-line tumors of the pancreas

Standard pancreatic resections, such as pancreaticoduodenectomy, distal pancreatectomy, or total pancreatectomy, result in an important loss of normal pancreatic parenchyma and may cause impairment of exocrine and endocrine function. Whilst these procedures are mandatory for malignant tumors, they seem to be too extensive for benign or border-line tumors, especially in patients with a long life expectancy. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in parenchyma-sparing pancreatic surgery with the aim of achieving better functional results without compromising oncological radicality in patients with benign, border-line or low-grade malignant tumors. Several limited resections have been introduced for isolated or multiple pancreatic lesions, depending on the location of the tumor: central pancreatectomy, duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection with or without segmental duodenectomy, inferior head resection, dorsal pancreatectomy, excavation of the pancreatic head, middle-preserving pancreatectomy, and other multiple segmental resections. All these procedures are technically feasible in experienced hands, with very low mortality, although with high morbidity rate when compared to standard procedures. Pancreatic endocrine and exocrine function is better preserved with good quality of life in most of the patients, and tumor recurrence is uncommon. Careful patient selection and expertise in pancreatic surgery are crucial to achieve the best results.

Single-centre experience of laparoscopic pancreatic surgery

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Laparoscopic surgery for pancreatic tumors

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

Traumatic Transection of Pancreas at the Neck: Feasibility of Parenchymal Preserving Strategy

BACKGROUND

To assess the feasibility and safety of a pancreas preserving operative technique in the management of isolated complete pancreatic neck transection following blunt abdominal trauma.

METHODS

Two patients with isolated blunt fracture of the pancreatic neck underwent pancreas preserving procedure comprising of oversewing of the proximal pancreas and Roux-en-Y pancreatico jejunostomy to the distal remnant. A feeding jejunostomy tube was placed for postoperative nutritional support in these patients. Both patients received subcutaneous octreotide 300 µg/day.

RESULTS

Their ages ranged from 15 years to 20 years, mode of injury was bicycle handle-bar injury (n = 2). Both had pancreatic transection at neck in the line of superior mesenteric vessels. One had ascites. These patients had pancreas parenchyma preserving surgery - internal drainage of the left remnant in a Roux-en-Y jejunal loop. The postoperative course was uneventful in these and both are well on follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreas preserving strategy - suture of head side of pancreas and an internal drainage of left remnant with a Roux-en-Y jejunal loop is feasible and safe and should be considered in selected cases. Substantial amount of normal pancreatic parenchyma is preserved.

Should all distal pancreatectomies be performed laparoscopically?

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

Central pancreatectomy without anastomosis

Background

Central pancreatectomy has a unique application for lesions in the neck of the pancreas. It preserves the distal pancreas and its endocrine functions. It also preserves the spleen.

Methods

This is a retrospective review of 10 patients who underwent central pancreatectomy without pancreatico-enteric anastomosis between October 2005 and May 2009. The surgical indications, operative outcomes, and pathologic findings were analyzed.

Results

All 10 lesions were in the neck of the pancreas and included: 2 branch intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs), a mucinous cyst, a lymphoid cyst, 5 neuroendocrine tumors, and a clear cell adenoma.

Conclusion

Central pancreatectomy without pancreatico-enteric anastomosis for lesions in the neck and proximal pancreas is a safe and effective procedure. Morbidity is low because there is no anastomosis. Long term endocrine and exocrine function has been maintained.

Roux-en-Y end-to-end and end-to-side double pancreaticojejunostomy: application of the reconstructive method of the Beger procedure to central pancreatectomy

PURPOSES

Central pancreatectomy is indicated for treatment of traumatic lesions and benign or low-grade tumors of the pancreatic neck and proximal body. After central pancreatectomy, the proximal pancreatic stump is usually closed, and pancreaticojejunostomy or pancreaticogastrostomy carried out with the distal pancreas. Adopting these reconstructive techniques in most series revealed a prevalence of postoperative fistula that was higher than after pancreaticoduodenectomy or left pancreatectomy. We present a case treated by novel application of the reconstructive method of the Beger procedure.

METHODS

Reconstruction by Roux-en-Y double pancreaticojejunostomy after central pancreatectomy was done in a 71-year-old female suffering from insulinoma of the proximal pancreatic body.

RESULTS

Postoperative complications were not observed. No alteration of pancreatic endocrine and exocrine function occurred at 22-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Double pancreaticojejunostomy is a promising method for treating the proximal pancreatic stump after central pancreatectomy.

Middle pancreatectomy: safety and long-term results

BACKGROUND

Pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy for lesions of the neck or body of the pancreas sacrifice a large amount of normal pancreatic tissue. Middle pancreatectomy (MP) is a parenchyma sparing technique that reduces the risk of postoperative endocrine and exocrine insufficiency. This study aims to evaluate the perioperative and long-term results of MP and to clarify whether MP can be performed with outcomes comparable with traditional pancreatectomies.

METHOD

Twenty-six patients who underwent MP for benign or low-grade malignant tumor of the pancreas between 1991 and 2006 at the Department of Surgery II, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, were identified. Their outcomes were compared with 2 separate control groups, 35 left-side pancreatectomies (LSP) and 60 right-side pancreatectomies (RSP).

RESULTS

The mean operating time of the MP group was 295 minutes, which was significantly shorter than that for RSP (P=.0001). The rate of pancreatic fistula formation was higher in the MP group than in the 2 control groups, although the differences did not reach statistical significance. After a mean follow-up of 71 months, postoperative endocrine function was equivalent to the pre-operative values in the MP group, and none of the patients developed diabetes mellitus postoperatively. Only 1 patient in the MP group required enzyme substitution postoperatively for exocrine insufficiency. The MP group was inclined to be superior to the other 2 control groups in terms of postoperative nutritional status.

CONCLUSION

Middle pancreatectomy is a reasonable technique that is indicated for selected patients with benign or low malignant tumors in the neck and body of the pancreas. Middle pancreatectomy seems to result in better preservation of exocrine and endocrine functions as well as in better nutritional status postoperatively.

Laparoscopic pancreatic resection for cancer

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