Literature DB >> 17593462

Systemic inflammatory response syndrome after hand-assisted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.

Takeyuki Misawa1, Hiroaki Shiba, Teruyuki Usuba, Takuya Nojiri, Kumiko Kitajima, Tadashi Uwagawa, Yoichi Toyama, Yuichi Ishida, Yuji Ishii, Akira Yanagisawa, Susumu Kobayashi, Katsuhiko Yanaga.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although the clinical benefits of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery have been shown in several procedures including colorectal resection, splenectomy and gastrectomy, efficacy and invasiveness in pancreatic surgery have not been well investigated. We assessed the clinical benefits and invasiveness of hand-assisted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (HALS-DP) in relation to the occurrence of post-operative systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS).
METHODS: Subjects comprised 8 patients underwent HALS-DP (with splenectomy, n = 7; without splenectomy, n = 1) for benign or low malignant pancreatic lesions between March 2004 and December 2005. Indications for HALS-DP consisted of mucinous cystadenoma (n = 4), endocrine tumors (n = 2), serous cystadenoma (n = 1) and pancreatic pseudocyst (n = 1). Controls comprised 9 patients who underwent conventional open distal pancreatectomy (Open-DP) for benign or low malignant lesions of the pancreas in the same period.
RESULTS: No significant differences were identified between HALS-DP and Open-DP in operation time. However, intra-operative blood loss, CRP on post-operative day (POD) 1 [5.5 mg/dl (1.8-8.1) vs. 9.7 mg/dl (5.9-12.1); p = .006] and POD 3 [8.5 mg/dl (1.7-11.1) vs. 17.7 mg/dl (10.7-21.5); p = .003], occurrence of post-operative SIRS (13% vs. 67%; p < .05, one-sided), duration of SIRS [0 day (0-1) vs. 1 day (0-4); p = .02] and post-operative hospital stay were significantly lower in HALS-DP than in Open-DP. Furthermore, no pancreatic fistula was seen with HALS-DP, as compared to 2 (22%) with Open-DP.
CONCLUSION: HALS-DP is safer and less invasive than Open-DP for benign or low malignant pancreatic tumors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17593462     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-006-9149-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  23 in total

1.  Randomized controlled trial of laparoscopic versus open colectomy for advanced colorectal cancer.

Authors:  H Hasegawa; Y Kabeshima; M Watanabe; S Yamamoto; M Kitajima
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-02-10       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  Current status and trends in laparoscopic antireflux surgery: results of a consensus meeting. The European Study Group for Antireflux Surgery (ESGARS).

Authors:  K H Fuchs; H Feussner; L Bonavina; J M Collard; W Coosemans
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 10.093

3.  Randomized controlled trial of hand-assisted laparoscopic versus open surgical live donor nephrectomy.

Authors:  J S Wolf ; R M Merion; A B Leichtman; D A Campbell; J C Magee; J D Punch; J G Turcotte; J W Konnak
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2001-07-27       Impact factor: 4.939

Review 4.  Current status of laparoscopic surgery of the pancreas.

Authors:  R A Underwood; N J Soper
Journal:  J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg       Date:  1999

5.  Completely laparoscopic total and partial gastrectomy for benign and malignant diseases: a single institute's prospective analysis.

Authors:  Jean-Louis Dulucq; Pascal Wintringer; Jacques Perissat; Ahmad Mahajna
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 6.113

6.  Prospective randomized trial comparing conventional laparoscopic colectomy with hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy: applicability, immediate clinical outcome, inflammatory response, and cost.

Authors:  E M Targarona; E Gracia; J Garriga; C Martínez-Bru; M Cortés; R Boluda; L Lerma; M Trías
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2001-10-13       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Complications of laparoscopic splenectomy.

Authors:  E M Targarona; J J Espert; E Bombuy; O Vidal; G Cerdán; V Artigas; M Trías
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2000-10

8.  Hand-assisted laparoscopic resection of serous cystadenoma of the pancreas.

Authors:  R Doi; D Ito; K Fujimoto; I Komoto; Y Ohta; M Torii; M Imamura
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-11-06       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A prospective analysis of 100 initial patients.

Authors:  J H Peters; E C Ellison; J T Innes; J L Liss; K E Nichols; J M Lomano; S R Roby; M E Front; L C Carey
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy vs open colectomy: a prospective randomized study.

Authors:  J-C Kang; M-H Chung; P-C Chao; C-C Yeh; C-W Hsiao; T-Y Lee; S-W Jao
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-03-19       Impact factor: 4.584

View more
  12 in total

1.  Gastric tube reconstruction by laparoscopy-assisted surgery attenuates postoperative systemic inflammatory response after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Hironori Tsujimoto; Satoshi Ono; Hidekazu Sugasawa; Takashi Ichikura; Junji Yamamoto; Kazuo Hase
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.352

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

3.  Learning curve for hand-assisted laparoscopic D2 radical gastrectomy.

Authors:  Jia-Qing Gong; Yong-Kuan Cao; Yong-Hua Wang; Guo-Hu Zhang; Pei-Hong Wang; Guo-De Luo
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-02-07       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 4.  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

Review 5.  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 6.  Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: a review of present results and future prospects.

Authors:  Omer S Al-Taan; James A Stephenson; Christopher Briggs; Cristina Pollard; Matthew S Metcalfe; Ashley R Dennison
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 3.647

7.  Three-step hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery for radical distal gastrectomy: an effective surgical approach.

Authors:  Jia-Qing Gong; Yong-Kuan Cao; Yong-Hua Wang; Guo-Hu Zhang; Pei-Hong Wang; Guo-De Luo
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2014-08-15

8.  [Indications for laparoscopic pancreas operations: results of a consensus conference and the previous laparoscopic pancreas register].

Authors:  M Siech; D Bartsch; H G Beger; S Benz; U Bergmann; P Busch; L Fernandez-Cruz; U Hopt; T Keck; T J Musholt; U J Roblick; L Steinmüller; P Strauss; M Strik; J Werner; S Huschitt
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 0.955

9.  Ten years of experience with resection of left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: evolution and initial experience to a laparoscopic approach.

Authors:  Chang Moo Kang; Dong Hyun Kim; Woo Jung Lee
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-01-07       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Prospective randomized comparison of clinical results between hand-assisted laparoscopic and open splenectomies.

Authors:  Umut Barbaros; Ahmet Dinççağ; Aziz Sümer; Rosario Vecchio; Domenico Rusello; Valentina Randazzo; Halim Issever; Cavit Avci
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-06-24       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.