Literature DB >> 17419274

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a comparative study.

C N Tang1, K K Tsui, J P Y Ha, D C T Wong, M K W Li.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: This article aims to describe the different techniques of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and to compare the results of our series of 9 laparoscopic resections against the historical open control in the same institution. With the advent of laparoscopic surgery, there is an increasing number of patients with different pancreatic pathologies that can now be managed by minimal access surgery. The initial results of laparoscopic pancreatectomy are quite promising particularly for those small neuroendocrine and cystic neoplasms located at the body and tail of pancreas.
METHODOLOGY: The different techniques of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy are described in detail with special emphasis on the need of "hand assistance" and the different methods of splenic preservation. The perioperative data of 9 laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies are analyzed and compared against the 5 historical open controls in the same institution.
RESULTS: There were 9 laparoscopic pancreatic resections performed in our institution since 1999. Indications for surgery included 5 cystic neoplasms (1 patient with concomitant splenic artery aneurysm), 1 chronic pancreatitis with pancreatic duct stricture and a small pseudocyst, 1 pseudopancreatic tumor secondary to seal off perforated posterior gastric ulcer, 1 pseudopapillary tumor and 1 neuroendocrine tumor. There were 6 females and 3 males with median age of 61 years (range 18-79). The majority of patients was of low anesthetic risk (ASA 1 or 2). Total laparoscopic resection was performed in 7 cases and 2 resections were performed using the hand-assisting technique. Out of the 4 cases with splenic preservation, only one patient had both splenic artery and vein successfully preserved, whereas the other 3 cases had to rely on the short gastric arcade. Median operating time was 180 minutes (range 120-250) and median blood loss was 100cc (range 50-500). Pancreatic leak occurred in two patients (22.2%) and 1 patient developed intraabdominal collection, all of which settled upon conservative treatment. In our series, clear resection margin was obtained for all the neoplastic cases. Median hospital stay was 7 days (4-53). Postoperatively, patients consumed an average of 15 tablets of dologesic. No other complications were observed upon a median follow-up of 15 months (1-50). When results were compared to the 5 historical open controls (excluding those malignant tumors), patients managed with this new approach had significantly less intraoperative blood loss (100 vs. 450 mL, P = 0.021).
CONCLUSIONS: Our initial experience not only confirmed the feasibility oflaparoscopic pancreatectomy, but also demonstrated the promising results of this approach in selected patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17419274

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hepatogastroenterology        ISSN: 0172-6390


  21 in total

1.  Robotic distal pancreatectomy versus conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a comparative study for short-term outcomes.

Authors:  Eric C H Lai; Chung Ngai Tang
Journal:  Front Med       Date:  2015-08-13       Impact factor: 4.592

2.  Metaanalysis of trials comparing minimally invasive and open distal pancreatectomies.

Authors:  Giuseppe R Nigri; Alan S Rosman; Niccolò Petrucciani; Alessandro Fancellu; Michele Pisano; Luigi Zorcolo; Giovanni Ramacciato; Marcovalerio Melis
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-12-24       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Systematic review of minimally invasive pancreatic resection.

Authors:  Christopher D Briggs; Christopher D Mann; Glen R B Irving; Christopher P Neal; Mark Peterson; Iain C Cameron; David P Berry
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2009-01-07       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is as safe and feasible as open procedure: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kun Xie; Yi-Ping Zhu; Xiao-Wu Xu; Ke Chen; Jia-Fei Yan; Yi-Ping Mou
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-04-28       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Perioperative and long-term results after left pancreatectomy: a single-institution, non-randomized, comparative study between open and laparoscopic approach.

Authors:  Giovanni Butturini; Stefano Partelli; Stefano Crippa; Giuseppe Malleo; Roberto Rossini; Luca Casetti; Gian Luigi Melotti; Micaela Piccoli; Paolo Pederzoli; Claudio Bassi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-03-18       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 6.  Laparoscopic pancreatectomy: indications and outcomes.

Authors:  Shuyin Liang; Usmaan Hameed; Shiva Jayaraman
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-10-21       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 7.  Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Bulent Salman; Tonguc Utku Yilmaz; Kursat Dikmen; Mehmet Kaplan
Journal:  J Vis Surg       Date:  2016-08-12

Review 8.  Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review of comparative studies.

Authors:  Asri C Jusoh; Basil J Ammori
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-11-15       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 9.  A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Tao Jin; Kiran Altaf; Jun J Xiong; Wei Huang; Muhammad A Javed; Gang Mai; Xu B Liu; Wei M Hu; Qing Xia
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2012-08-07       Impact factor: 3.647

10.  Comparative analysis of clinical outcomes for laparoscopic distal pancreatic resection and open distal pancreatic resection at a single institution.

Authors:  Song C Kim; Kwan T Park; Ji W Hwang; Hyeng C Shin; Sang S Lee; Dong W Seo; Sung K Lee; Myung H Kim; Duck J Han
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-06-05       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.