BACKGROUND: The indications for laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) and its morbidity compared with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (LDPS) are ill-defined. This study aimed to share the indications for spleen-preservation and investigate the safety and outcome of LSPDP at our institution. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who were scheduled to receive laparoscopic surgery for distal pancreatic lesions was conducted. The indications, surgical procedures, intra-operative data, and outcomes of the two procedures were collected and compared by statistical analysis. RESULTS: LDPS and LSPDP were successfully performed in 16 and 21 patients respectively, whereas they were converted to open surgery in 9 patients. There were no significant differences in age, gender, operation time, blood loss, and conversion rate between the LDPS and LSPDP groups. The mean tumor size showed an inter-group difference (5.05 vs 2.53 cm, P<0.001). There were no significant differences in complication and morbidity rates between the two groups. All patients remained alive without recurrence during a follow-up of 9 to 67 months (median 35). CONCLUSION: LSPDP has a morbidity and outcome comparable to LDPS.
BACKGROUND: The indications for laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) and its morbidity compared with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (LDPS) are ill-defined. This study aimed to share the indications for spleen-preservation and investigate the safety and outcome of LSPDP at our institution. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who were scheduled to receive laparoscopic surgery for distal pancreatic lesions was conducted. The indications, surgical procedures, intra-operative data, and outcomes of the two procedures were collected and compared by statistical analysis. RESULTS: LDPS and LSPDP were successfully performed in 16 and 21 patients respectively, whereas they were converted to open surgery in 9 patients. There were no significant differences in age, gender, operation time, blood loss, and conversion rate between the LDPS and LSPDP groups. The mean tumor size showed an inter-group difference (5.05 vs 2.53 cm, P<0.001). There were no significant differences in complication and morbidity rates between the two groups. All patients remained alive without recurrence during a follow-up of 9 to 67 months (median 35). CONCLUSION: LSPDP has a morbidity and outcome comparable to LDPS.
Authors: Bjørn Edwin; Mushegh A Sahakyan; Mohammad Abu Hilal; Marc G Besselink; Marco Braga; Jean-Michel Fabre; Laureano Fernández-Cruz; Brice Gayet; Song Cheol Kim; Igor E Khatkov Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-02-15 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Alma L Moekotte; Sanne Lof; Steve A White; Ravi Marudanayagam; Bilal Al-Sarireh; Sakhanat Rahman; Zahir Soonawalla; Mark Deakin; Somaiah Aroori; Basil Ammori; Dhanny Gomez; Gabriele Marangoni; Mohammed Abu Hilal Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-06-24 Impact factor: 4.584