BACKGROUND: The aims of this study were to compare splenic vessel patency between laparoscopic and open spleen and splenic vessel-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SSVpDP), and to identify possible risk factors for poor splenic vessel patency. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study included 116 patients who underwent laparoscopic (n = 70) or open (n = 46) SSVpDP at seven Korean tertiary medical institutions between 2004 and 2011. Clinical parameters and the splenic vessel patency assessed by abdominal computed tomography were compared between the two surgical procedures. RESULTS: The clinical parameters were not significantly different between both groups, except for postoperative hospital stay, which was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group (10.4 vs. 13.5 days, P = 0.024). The splenic artery patency rate was similar in both groups (90.0 vs. 97.8 %), but the splenic vein patency rate was significantly lower in the laparoscopic group (64.3 vs. 87.0 %, P = 0.022). Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed surgical procedure [odds ratio (OR) 3.085, P = 0.043] and intraoperative blood loss (OR 4.624, P = 0.002) as independent risk factors for compromised splenic vein patency (partial or total occlusion). The splenic vein patency rate was significantly better in the late group (n = 34) than in the early period (n = 35) (79.4 vs. 48.6 %, P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Although laparoscopic SSVpDP had an advantage of shorter hospital stay compared with open surgery, it was associated with greater risk of poor splenic vein patency. However, this risk could decrease with increasing surgical experience and with efforts to minimize blood loss.
BACKGROUND: The aims of this study were to compare splenic vessel patency between laparoscopic and open spleen and splenic vessel-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SSVpDP), and to identify possible risk factors for poor splenic vessel patency. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study included 116 patients who underwent laparoscopic (n = 70) or open (n = 46) SSVpDP at seven Korean tertiary medical institutions between 2004 and 2011. Clinical parameters and the splenic vessel patency assessed by abdominal computed tomography were compared between the two surgical procedures. RESULTS: The clinical parameters were not significantly different between both groups, except for postoperative hospital stay, which was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group (10.4 vs. 13.5 days, P = 0.024). The splenic artery patency rate was similar in both groups (90.0 vs. 97.8 %), but the splenic vein patency rate was significantly lower in the laparoscopic group (64.3 vs. 87.0 %, P = 0.022). Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed surgical procedure [odds ratio (OR) 3.085, P = 0.043] and intraoperative blood loss (OR 4.624, P = 0.002) as independent risk factors for compromised splenic vein patency (partial or total occlusion). The splenic vein patency rate was significantly better in the late group (n = 34) than in the early period (n = 35) (79.4 vs. 48.6 %, P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Although laparoscopic SSVpDP had an advantage of shorter hospital stay compared with open surgery, it was associated with greater risk of poor splenic vein patency. However, this risk could decrease with increasing surgical experience and with efforts to minimize blood loss.
Authors: Raghunandan Venkat; Barish H Edil; Richard D Schulick; Anne O Lidor; Martin A Makary; Christopher L Wolfgang Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Jean-Yves Mabrut; Laureano Fernandez-Cruz; Juan Santiago Azagra; Claudio Bassi; Georges Delvaux; Joseph Weerts; Jean-Michel Fabre; Jean Boulez; Jacques Baulieux; Jean-Louis Peix; Jean-François Gigot Journal: Surgery Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: David A Kooby; Theresa Gillespie; David Bentrem; Attila Nakeeb; Max C Schmidt; Nipun B Merchant; Alex A Parikh; Robert C G Martin; Charles R Scoggins; Syed Ahmad; Hong Jin Kim; Jaemin Park; Fabian Johnston; Matthew J Strouch; Alex Menze; Jennifer Rymer; Rebecca McClaine; Steven M Strasberg; Mark S Talamonti; Charles A Staley; Kelly M McMasters; Andrew M Lowy; Johnita Byrd-Sellers; William C Wood; William G Hawkins Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2008-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Daniel Borja-Cacho; Waddah B Al-Refaie; Selwyn M Vickers; Todd M Tuttle; Eric H Jensen Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2009-10-08 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Juan C Rodríguez-Sanjuán; Marcos Gómez-Ruiz; Soledad Trugeda-Carrera; Carlos Manuel-Palazuelos; Antonio López-Useros; Manuel Gómez-Fleitas Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-02-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Thijs de Rooij; Sjors Klompmaker; Mohammad Abu Hilal; Michael L Kendrick; Olivier R Busch; Marc G Besselink Journal: Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2016-02-17 Impact factor: 46.802
Authors: Claire Goumard; Satoshi Ogiso; Masayuki Okuno; Jason B Fleming; Michael Kim; Ching-Wei D Tzeng; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Jeffrey E Lee; Claudius Conrad Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-07-21 Impact factor: 4.584
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