1
|
Pancreatic Cystic Tumors: A Single-Center Observational Study. MEDICINA (KAUNAS, LITHUANIA) 2023; 59:medicina59020241. [PMID: 36837443 PMCID: PMC9964881 DOI: 10.3390/medicina59020241] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2022] [Revised: 01/22/2023] [Accepted: 01/24/2023] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
Background and Objectives: The aim of the study was to analyze the prevalence and characteristics of pancreatic cystic tumors (PCTs). Material and Methods: A retrospective analysis of the medical records of 124 patients, 102 (69%) women and 46 (31%) men, who had undergone surgery for pancreatic cystic tumors in 2014-2018. Among 148 pancreatic cysts, 24 (16%) were non-neoplasmatic and 124 (84%) were neoplasmatic. The neoplasmatic cysts (n = 124) were included in our analysis. There were five main types of PCTs: IPMN (intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm) (n = 45), MCN (mucinous cystic neoplasm) (n = 30), SCN (serous cystic neoplasm) (n = 28), SPN (solid pseudopapillary neoplasm) (n = 8), and CPEN (cystic pancreatic endocrine neoplasm) (n = 8), as well as mixed-type tumors (n = 5). Results: A statistically significant dependency between PCT type and age was proven (p= 0.0001): IPMNs were observed in the older group of patients with an average age of 66.12 (40-79) years while SPNs were noted in the youngest group of patients with an average age of 36.22 (22-55) years. A statistically significant association between PCT type and gender (p = 0.0001) was found: IPMNs occurred among 24 (53.33%) men and 21 (46.6%) women. In the MCN and SPN groups, all patients were female (100%). Among the SCN group, the majority were women (27 (96.43%)), and there was only 1 (3.57%) man. A statistically significant dependency between PCT type and size was proven (p = 0.0007). The mean size of IPMNs was the smallest 2.95 (0.6-10 cm) and the mean size of MCNs was the largest 6.78 (1.5-19 cm). A statistically significant dependency between PCT type and tumor location was proven (p = 0.000238). The most frequent location of IPMN was the pancreatic head: 27 (60%). MCN was most frequently located in the pancreatic tail (18 (60%)). Most (10/28) SCNs were found in the pancreatic tail (10 (35.71%)). CPENs were most frequently located in the pancreatic tail (three (37.5%)) and pancreatic body and tail (three (37.5%)). SPNs were located commonly in the pancreatic head (five (62.5%)). The type of surgery depended on the tumor location. The most frequent surgery for IPMNs was pancreatoduodenectomy (44.4%), while for MCNs and SCNs, it was distal pancreatectomy (81%). The postoperative morbidity and mortality were 34.68% and 1.61%, respectively. Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) was the most frequent (29%) complication. Conclusions: IPMN was the most frequent resected PCT in our material. A statistically significant association between the type of cyst and location within the pancreas, size, local lymph node involvement, and patient's age and sex was proved. POPF was the most frequent postoperative complication. In patients with PCTs, due to substantial postoperative morbidity, adequate patient selection, considering both the surgical risk as well as the long-term risk of malignant transformation, is very important during qualification for surgery.
Collapse
|
2
|
Morelli L, Di Franco G, Guadagni S, Palmeri M, Furbetta N, Funel N, Gianardi D, Palma AD, Pollina L, Moglia A, Pietrabissa A, Candio G, Mosca F, Cuschieri A. Robotic-assisted versus open left pancreatectomy for cystic tumours: A single-centre experience. J Minim Access Surg 2020; 16:66-70. [PMID: 30178768 PMCID: PMC6945332 DOI: 10.4103/jmas.jmas_158_18] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Cystic pancreatic lesions (CPLs) are being identified increasingly, and some benefit from surgical treatment. With the increasing use of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) for neoplasms of the pancreas, the aim of the present comparative study is to establish whether the RAS offered any advantages over conventional open surgery (OS) in the management of CPLs. Patients and Methods: Twenty-seven out of 37 robot-assisted left-sided pancreatectomy (LSP) performed between January 2010 and April 2017 were carried out for CPLs. The surgical outcome and histopathology were compared retrospectively with a control group of 27 patients who had undergone open LSP for CPLs, selected using a one-to-one case-matched methodology (OS-Group) from the prospectively collected institutional database. Results: The spleen was preserved in a significantly higher percentage of patients in the RAS-group (63% vs. 33.3%, P < 0.05). There was no difference in the post-operative course (pancreatic fistula and morbidity) between the two groups. The median post-operative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the RAS-group: 8 days (range 3–25) versus 12 days (range 7–26) in the OS-group (P < 0.01). No conversion to open approach was reported in the RAS-group. Conclusions: Robotically assisted LSP is a safe and effective procedure. It is accompanied by a significantly higher spleen preservation rate compared to the open approach. In addition, because of the reduced trauma, RAS incurred a shorter post-operative hospital stay and faster return to full recovery, particularly important in patients undergoing surgery for relative indications. However, these benefits of RAS for LSP require confirmation by prospective randomised controlled studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luca Morelli
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Translational and New Technologies in Medicine; EndoCAS (Center for Computer Assisted Surgery), University of Pisa, Italy
| | - Gregorio Di Franco
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Translational and New Technologies in Medicine, University of Pisa, Italy
| | - Simone Guadagni
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Translational and New Technologies in Medicine, University of Pisa, Italy
| | - Matteo Palmeri
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Translational and New Technologies in Medicine, University of Pisa, Italy
| | - Niccolò Furbetta
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Translational and New Technologies in Medicine, University of Pisa, Italy
| | - Niccola Funel
- Division of Surgical Pathology, University of Pisa, Italy
| | - Desirée Gianardi
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Translational and New Technologies in Medicine, University of Pisa, Italy
| | - Andrea De Palma
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Translational and New Technologies in Medicine, University of Pisa, Italy
| | - Luca Pollina
- Division of Surgical Pathology, University of Pisa, Italy
| | - Andrea Moglia
- EndoCAS (Center for Computer Assisted Surgery), University of Pisa, Italy
| | | | - Giulio Candio
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Translational and New Technologies in Medicine, University of Pisa, Italy
| | - Franco Mosca
- EndoCAS (Center for Computer Assisted Surgery), University of Pisa, Italy
| | - Alfred Cuschieri
- Institute for Medical Science and Technology, University of Dundee, Scotland, UK, Scotland
| |
Collapse
|