PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and outcomes of laparoscopic splenic vessel preservation (Lap-SVP) to those of laparoscopic Warshaw technique (Lap-WT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fourteen patients underwent Lap-SVP and 5 patients underwent Lap-WT. Their clinical data and outcomes of the 2 procedures were compared. RESULTS: The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, clinically relevant pancreatic fistula, and the rate of splenic infarction were significantly higher in the patients who underwent Lap-WT than in those who underwent Lap-SVP. In both groups, the platelet count ratio and splenic volume ratio at 1 month after the operation did not differ from the preoperative values. Two patients in the Lap-WT group experienced splenic infarction, and could be observed without any treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term outcome of Lap-WT was relevant. Therefore, Lap-WT could be a treatment option for patients who may not have undergone Lap-SVP.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and outcomes of laparoscopic splenic vessel preservation (Lap-SVP) to those of laparoscopic Warshaw technique (Lap-WT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fourteen patients underwent Lap-SVP and 5 patients underwent Lap-WT. Their clinical data and outcomes of the 2 procedures were compared. RESULTS: The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, clinically relevant pancreatic fistula, and the rate of splenic infarction were significantly higher in the patients who underwent Lap-WT than in those who underwent Lap-SVP. In both groups, the platelet count ratio and splenic volume ratio at 1 month after the operation did not differ from the preoperative values. Two patients in the Lap-WT group experienced splenic infarction, and could be observed without any treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term outcome of Lap-WT was relevant. Therefore, Lap-WT could be a treatment option for patients who may not have undergone Lap-SVP.