Mushegh A Sahakyan1,2,3, Bård Ingvald Røsok4, Airazat M Kazaryan5,6, Leonid Barkhatov5,7, Sven-Petter Haugvik7,8, Åsmund Avdem Fretland5,7,6, Dejan Ignjatovic6, Knut Jørgen Labori4, Bjørn Edwin5,7,4. 1. The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, 0027, Oslo, Norway. sahakyan.mushegh@gmail.com. 2. Institute of Clinical Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. sahakyan.mushegh@gmail.com. 3. Department of Surgery No 1, Yerevan State Medical University After M. Heratsi, Yerevan, Armenia. sahakyan.mushegh@gmail.com. 4. Department of HPB Sugery, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway. 5. The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, 0027, Oslo, Norway. 6. Department of Digestive Surgery, Akershus University Hospital, University of Oslo, Lørenskog, Norway. 7. Institute of Clinical Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. 8. Department of Surgery, Drammen Hospital, Vestre Viken Hospital Trust, Drammen, Norway.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies report successful application of laparoscopic pancreatic enucleation (LPE). However, the evidence is limited to small series. This study aimed to evaluate the indications, technique and outcome of LPE at a tertiary care institution. METHODS: Between February 1998 and April 2016, 45 consecutive LPEs were performed at Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet. Twenty-four (53.3 %) patients subjected to right-sided LPE (RLPE) were compared with 21 (46.7 %) patients who had undergone left-sided LPE (LLPE). A case-matched analysis (1:2) was performed to compare the outcomes following LLPE and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). RESULTS: Patient demographics, BMI, ASA score and pathological characteristics were similar between the RLPE and LLPE groups. Operative time was slightly longer for RLPE [123 (53-320) vs 102 (50-373) min, P = 0.09]. The rates of severe morbidity (≥Accordion grade III) and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (grades B/C) were comparable, although with a trend for higher rate of complications following LLPE (16.7 vs 33.3 %; P = 0.19 and 20.8 vs 33.3 %, P = 0.34, respectively). The hospital stay was similar between RLPE and LLPE [5 (2-80) vs 7 (2-52), P = 0.49]. A case-matched analysis demonstrated shorter operating time [145 (90-350) vs 103 (50-233) min, P = 0.02], but higher readmission rate following LLPE (25 vs 3.1 %, P = 0.037). CONCLUSION: LLPE seems to be associated with a higher risk of postoperative morbidity and readmission rates than LDP. RLPE is a feasible, safe approach and a reasonable alternative to pancreatoduodenectomy in selected patients with pancreatic lesions.
BACKGROUND: Previous studies report successful application of laparoscopic pancreatic enucleation (LPE). However, the evidence is limited to small series. This study aimed to evaluate the indications, technique and outcome of LPE at a tertiary care institution. METHODS: Between February 1998 and April 2016, 45 consecutive LPEs were performed at Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet. Twenty-four (53.3 %) patients subjected to right-sided LPE (RLPE) were compared with 21 (46.7 %) patients who had undergone left-sided LPE (LLPE). A case-matched analysis (1:2) was performed to compare the outcomes following LLPE and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). RESULTS:Patient demographics, BMI, ASA score and pathological characteristics were similar between the RLPE and LLPE groups. Operative time was slightly longer for RLPE [123 (53-320) vs 102 (50-373) min, P = 0.09]. The rates of severe morbidity (≥Accordion grade III) and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (grades B/C) were comparable, although with a trend for higher rate of complications following LLPE (16.7 vs 33.3 %; P = 0.19 and 20.8 vs 33.3 %, P = 0.34, respectively). The hospital stay was similar between RLPE and LLPE [5 (2-80) vs 7 (2-52), P = 0.49]. A case-matched analysis demonstrated shorter operating time [145 (90-350) vs 103 (50-233) min, P = 0.02], but higher readmission rate following LLPE (25 vs 3.1 %, P = 0.037). CONCLUSION: LLPE seems to be associated with a higher risk of postoperative morbidity and readmission rates than LDP. RLPE is a feasible, safe approach and a reasonable alternative to pancreatoduodenectomy in selected patients with pancreatic lesions.
Authors: C E Cauley; H A Pitt; K M Ziegler; A Nakeeb; C M Schmidt; N J Zyromski; M G House; K D Lillemoe Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Michael W Müller; Helmut Friess; Jörg Kleeff; Ulf Hinz; Moritz N Wente; Daniel Paramythiotis; Pascal O Berberat; Güralp O Ceyhan; Markus W Büchler Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Yoshihiro Mise; Ryan W Day; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Kristoffer W Brudvik; Lilian Schwarz; Laura Prakash; Nathan H Parker; Matthew H G Katz; Claudius Conrad; Jeffrey E Lee; Jason B Fleming; Thomas A Aloia Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Anneke P J Jilesen; Casper H J van Eijck; Olivier R C Busch; Thomas M van Gulik; Dirk J Gouma; Els J M Nieveen van Dijkum Journal: World J Surg Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 3.352
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: A Balduzzi; J van Hilst; M Korrel; S Lof; B Al-Sarireh; A Alseidi; F Berrevoet; B Björnsson; P van den Boezem; U Boggi; O R Busch; G Butturini; R Casadei; R van Dam; S Dokmak; B Edwin; M A Sahakyan; G Ercolani; J M Fabre; M Falconi; A Forgione; B Gayet; D Gomez; B Groot Koerkamp; T Hackert; T Keck; I Khatkov; C Krautz; R Marudanayagam; K Menon; A Pietrabissa; I Poves; A Sa Cunha; R Salvia; S Sánchez-Cabús; Z Soonawalla; M Abu Hilal; M G Besselink Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2021-01-04 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Tousif Kabir; Zoe Z X Tan; Nicholas Syn; Alexander Y F Chung; London L P J Ooi; Brian K P Goh Journal: Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg Date: 2019-08-30