BACKGROUND: Few studies have compared laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (Lap-DP) and open distal pancreatectomy (open-DP). The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcome of Lap-DP and compare it to that of open-DP. METHODS: A total of 37 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy (Lap-DP, 21 patients; open-DP, 16 patients) between January 2000 and March 2007 were enrolled in this study. Prior to January 2004, open-DP was the standard procedure for patients with a lesion in the distal pancreas without invasive ductal cancer; thereafter, Lap-DP was also an approved procedure. All 16 open-DP procedures were performed prior to January 2004. RESULTS: The operating times for the Lap-DP and open-DP patients were 308.4 +/- 124.6 and 281.5 +/- 83.3 min, respectively, and these were not significantly different (P = 0.4635). Blood loss for the Lap-DP group (249.0 +/- 239.8 ml) was significantly smaller than that for the open-DP group (714.1 +/- 650.4 ml) (P = 0.0055), and none of the patients in the Lap-DP group received transfusions. The frequency of complications for the Lap-DP and open-DP groups was 0 and 18.8%, respectively, which is not significantly different (P = 0.0784). The average hospital stay for the Lap-DP group was significantly shorter than that for the open-DP group (10.0 +/- 2.6 vs. 25.8 +/- 8.8 days; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: In pancreatic diseases, other than invasive ductal cancer, arising in the distal pancreas, Lap-DP might be a more feasible and safer than open-DP.
BACKGROUND: Few studies have compared laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (Lap-DP) and open distal pancreatectomy (open-DP). The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcome of Lap-DP and compare it to that of open-DP. METHODS: A total of 37 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy (Lap-DP, 21 patients; open-DP, 16 patients) between January 2000 and March 2007 were enrolled in this study. Prior to January 2004, open-DP was the standard procedure for patients with a lesion in the distal pancreas without invasive ductal cancer; thereafter, Lap-DP was also an approved procedure. All 16 open-DP procedures were performed prior to January 2004. RESULTS: The operating times for the Lap-DP and open-DPpatients were 308.4 +/- 124.6 and 281.5 +/- 83.3 min, respectively, and these were not significantly different (P = 0.4635). Blood loss for the Lap-DP group (249.0 +/- 239.8 ml) was significantly smaller than that for the open-DP group (714.1 +/- 650.4 ml) (P = 0.0055), and none of the patients in the Lap-DP group received transfusions. The frequency of complications for the Lap-DP and open-DP groups was 0 and 18.8%, respectively, which is not significantly different (P = 0.0784). The average hospital stay for the Lap-DP group was significantly shorter than that for the open-DP group (10.0 +/- 2.6 vs. 25.8 +/- 8.8 days; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: In pancreatic diseases, other than invasive ductal cancer, arising in the distal pancreas, Lap-DP might be a more feasible and safer than open-DP.
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
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