RETRACTED ARTICLE: Preoperative endoscopic pancreatic stenting: a novel prophylactic measure against pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy

Background/Purpose

The prevention of pancreatic fistula is still a major problem in distal pancreatectomy (DP). We have recently adopted preoperative endoscopic pancreatic stenting with the aim of preventing the leakage of pancreatic juice from the resection plane of the remnant pancreas after DP. We reviewed ten patients who underwent this intervention.

Methods

One to 6 days before surgery, the patients underwent an endoscopic transpapillary pancreatic stent (7 Fr., 3 cm) placement. The perioperative short-term outcomes were assessed.

Results

Preoperative endoscopic pancreatic stenting was successfully performed in all ten patients. Two (20%) patients, both with intraductal papillary mucinous tumor, developed mild acute pancreatitis after the stent placement. None of the ten patients developed pancreatic fistula. The pancreatic stent was removed 8–28 days (mean, 11 days) postoperatively.

Conclusions

Preoperative endoscopic pancreatic stenting may be an effective prophylactic measure against pancreatic fistula development following DP.

     

Feasibility of endoscopic transgastric distal pancreatectomy in a porcine animal model

BACKGROUND: In contrast to laparoscopic tubal ligation, oophorectomy, and appendectomy, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is associated with a morbidity rate of more than 50% and a mortality rate of more than 3%. OBJECTIVE: To develop a minimally invasive, transgastric endoscopic technique for distal pancreatectomy in a nonsurvival series in swine. DESIGN: Experimental study. SETTING: Animal trial at a tertiary-care academic hospital. SUBJECTS: Six healthy Yorkshire swine under general anesthesia. INTERVENTIONS: A double-channel gastroscope was introduced into the stomach, and a gastric incision was created by using a triple-lumen, 4-mm, cutting-wire needle knife. The peritoneal cavity was accessed. An Endoloop was placed endoscopically around the distal aspect of the pancreas, and the tail of the pancreas was transected by using a diathermic snare. One to 3 hemoclips were placed across the pancreatic duct. The pancreatic specimen was retrieved, and the gastrotomy was closed endoscopically with metal clips. The animals were euthanized after the procedure. The abdominal cavity was examined grossly, and the resected pancreas was examined histologically. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASUREMENTS: Feasibility of endoscopic transgastric distal pancreatectomy and rate of complications. RESULTS: The pancreatic tail was successfully resected via a transgastric endoscopic approach in all animals. The procedure took an average (standard deviation) of 77.3 +/- 18.9 minutes. There was 1 complication, an episode of bleeding from a splenic laceration, which resulted in the loss of 250 mL of blood. LIMITATIONS: Nonsurvival series, animal study. CONCLUSIONS: Transgastric endoscopic distal pancreatectomy is technically feasible and can be performed in the porcine animal model.     

Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: a review of present results and future prospects

Pancreatic surgery is still associated with a relatively high morbidity and mortality compared with other specialties. This is a result of the complex nature of the organ, the difficult access as a result of the retroperitoneal position and the number of technically challenging anastomoses required. Nevertheless, the past two decades have witnessed a steady improvement in morbidity and a decrease in mortality achieved through alterations of technique (particularly relating to the pancreatic anastomoses) together with hormonal manipulation to decrease pancreatic secretions.Recently minimally invasive pancreatic surgery has been attempted by several centres around the world which has stimulated considerable interest in this approach. The majority of the cases attempted have been distal pancreatectomies, because of the more straightforward nature of the resection and the lack of a pancreatic ductal anastomosis, but more recently reports of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy have started to appear.The reports of the series to date have been difficult to interpret and although the results are claimed to be equivalent or better than those associated with a traditional approach a careful examination of the literature and comparison with the best results previously reported does not presently support this. In the present review we examined all the reports of pancreatic procedures performed laparoscopically and compared the results with those previously achieved at open surgery.     

Clinical outcome of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

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.     

Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: its indications and techniques: from the viewpoint of limiting the indications

Indications in the field of pancreatic surgery should be limited considering the technical difficulties and the characteristics of pancreatic diseases. Benign or low‐grade malignant tumors, including pseudocysts, islet tumors, and cystic tumors, are indications for distal pancreatectomy. Islet tumors such as insulinomas are good candidates for this procedure when they are located near splenic vessels or the main pancreatic duct and enucleation is considered inappropriate. Techniques of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with/without splenectomy and laparoscopy‐assisted distal pancreatectomy indicated in low‐grade malignant tumors such as mucinous cystadenoma are described. Insulinoma is one of the best candidates for enucleation because many of the cases are solitary and benign. The technique of enucleation is also described.     

A simple and safe pancreas transection using a stapling device for a distal pancreatectomy

Pancreatic fistula is the most common major complication to occur after distal pancreatectomy, ranging in frequency from 5% to 40%. The appropriate technique for treating the pancreatic stump still remains controversial. Thirty-six patients underwent distal pancreatectomy in Kagawa University Hospital between January 2000 and February 2007. Their hospital records were reviewed to evaluate the usefulness of a stapling closure using several types of staplers in comparison to a suture closure. They were subdivided according to the method used to close the pancreas stump: the suture group comprised 11 patients, the staple group comprised 24 patients, including 7 patients for whom was used the new endopath stapler Echelon 60 (Ethicon Endo-surgery; Johnson & Johnson, Cincinnati, OH, USA). Overall pancreatic fistula rate was 17% (6/36) in this series. In the staple group, 3 of the 24 patients (12%) developed a pancreatic fistula, whereas in the suture group, 3 of 11 patients (27%) developed a pancreatic fistula. Of the 7 patients for whom the Echelon 60 was used, none developed a pancreatic fistula. The length of postoperative hospital stay was also significantly shorter for the patients with the Echelon 60 than in the patients either with sutures or another stapling device. These findings support the advantages of using a stapler closure in distal pancreatectomy. This method, using a new stapler device, is considered to be a simple and safe alternative to the standard suture closure technique.     

Spleen and gastrosplenic ligament preserving distal pancreatectomy under a minimum incision approach assisted by laparoscopy

Background

As a modification of hand-assisted laparoscopic pancreatectomy, we devised a method of spleen and gastrosplenic ligament preserving distal pancreatectomy, in which pancreatic resection is performed under direct vision extracorporeally.

Methods

The distal pancreas and spleen are pulled out of the peritoneal cavity through the minilaparotomy at the epigastrium following hand-assisted laparoscopic dissection of the distal pancreas. Spleen-preserving pancreatectomy is performed safely under direct vision. The gastrosplenic ligament is also preserved to prevent splenic volvulus after the operation. The transected main pancreatic duct is doubly ligated, and the transected pancreatic stump is sewn manually. The preserved spleen and splenic vessels are placed back in the peritoneal cavity after resection.

Results

In the current study (n = 3), overall morbidity rate, including splenic volvulus and pancreatic fistula, was 0%.

Conclusion

Preservation of the gastrosplenic ligament and extracorporeal preparation of the transected pancreatic stump under direct vision are useful measures in spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy under a minimum incision approach assisted by laparoscopy.     

Tips on laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

An increasing number of laparoscopic pancreatic procedures are currently carried out worldwide. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) appears to be technically and oncologically promising in selected patients with benign tumors and low‐grade malignancies of the pancreatic body/tail, and is now widely adopted. Here, we described our standard procedures of LDP and some tips on LDP. Recent important insights into some variations/options of LDP including spleen preservation, hand‐assisted procedure, and single‐incision surgery are also reviewed in this article.     

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy in elderly subjects: splenic vessel sacrifice may be associated with a higher rate of splenic infarction

BackgroundLaparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy has gained popularity in recent years. Splenic preservation can be achieved with or without splenic vessel preservation (SVP). The potential morbidity of this approach in patients aged >70 years has not been well defined.MethodsTen patients aged >70 years underwent attempted laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy within a 2-year period. Multiple patient parameters were examined and chi-squared analysis was used to evaluate the association between the operative technique (SVP or splenic vessel division [SVD]) and splenic infarction. The Mann–Whitney test was used to compare the SVP and SVD groups with regard to age, estimated blood loss (EBL), operating time, splenic volume and length of stay (LoS).ResultsMedian age was 81 years (range: 71–92 years). Operating room time, LoS, EBL and complication rates were similar to those reported in published series of younger patients. In four patients, the splenic vessels were divided in a manner relying on short gastric collateral flow; SVP was achieved in all other patients. All four patients who underwent SVD developed splenic infarcts and three required splenectomy to manage this (P= 0.002). Median LoS was increased in the SVD group (9.3 days vs. 4.3 days; P= 0.053). Estimated blood loss was higher in the SVP group (200 ml vs. 100 ml; P= 0.091). One pancreatic leak occurred. There were no mortalities.ConclusionsSpleen-preserving laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy can be performed safely in elderly patients, with results comparable with those achieved in younger subjects. However, elderly patients undergoing division of the splenic artery and vein may be at higher risk for splenic infarct and the aetiology of this is unclear.     

Laparoscopic-assisted distal pancreatectomy and nephrectomy from a live donor

Background

The simultaneous transplantation of pancreas and kidney from live donors is performed in select countries. One of the reasons for this reduced applicability is the invasiveness of the donor operation. We propose the method of laparoscopic-assisted operation to be performed on live donors with minimal invasion.

Method

The donor was placed in the right lateral decubitus position. A 7-cm upper midline incision was made, and a handport was installed in addition to two or three 12-mm ports. After the removal of the left kidney graft, the spleen and the distal part of the pancreas were completely mobilized. The splenic vein and artery were identified and mobilized. The donor was then rotated to a supine position. Dissection of the pancreatic parenchyma using ultrasound shears and ligation of the splenic vessels were performed through midline incision under direct vision. The distal part of the pancreas and the spleen were extracted.

Results

Since December 2007, 3 donors have undergone this operation. In all 3 cases, the postoperative course was uneventful, and both the renal and pancreatic grafts functioned well.

Conclusion

This technique is minimally invasive and safe, and may become the standard method of live donor operation for simultaneous pancreas–kidney transplantation.     

Surgical management for the prevention of pancreatic fistula following distal pancreatectomy

Although the mortality rate related to pancreatic surgery has been reduced recently, the postoperative morbidity is still high, because of various complications. Pancreatic fistula is one of the most common complications following distal pancreatectomy, and is generally hard to cure. Several surgical techniques and devices, such as the use of fibrin-glue sealing, stapler closure, an ultrasonic dissector, or an ultrasonically activated scalpel have been advocated to prevent pancreatic fistula. In the present review we provide an overview of several devices used for the prevention of pancreatic fistula following distal pancreatectomy.     

Ligamentum teres hepatis patch enhances the healing of pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy

Pancreatic fistula is one of the most common complications after the distal pancreatectomy. Many methods have been tried to solve the problem, but no one is optimal, especially for the soft pancreatic stump cases. This study used ligamentum teres hepatis as a patch to cover the pancreatic stump. Between October 2010 and December 2012, seventy-seven patients who had undergone distal pancreatectomy with a soft pancreatic stump were divided into two groups: group A (n=39, patients received conventional ligated main pancreatic duct method) and group B (n=38, patients underwent a coverage procedure). Patients in group A had a longer recovery from postoperative pancreatic fistula than those in group B (16.4±3.5 vs 10.8±1.6 days, P<0.05). The coverage procedure with ligamentum teres hepatis is a safe, effective and convenient method for patients with a soft pancreas remnant during distal pancreatectomy.     

Distal pancreatectomy with preservation of the spleen

Distal pancreatectomy (resection of the pancreatic body and tail) can be performed with or without preservation of the spleen. Splenic preservation has the advantages of fewer postoperative complications such as abscesses in the resection bed, shorter length of hospitalization, and avoidance of the long-term risk of post-splenectomy sepsis related to encapsulated bacteria. Two techniques can be used to save the spleen: either by dissecting out the splenic artery and vein with division of the arterial and venous branches between the pancreas and the splenic artery and vein; or by resecting the splenic artery and vein along with the pancreas but with careful preservation of the vascular collaterals in the splenic hilum, which allows the spleen to survive on the short gastric vessels (Warshaw technique). The latter method has been shown to be associated with a shorter operation, less blood loss, and a shorter hospitalization. In general the Warshaw technique is easier, especially for laparoscopic pancreatectomy. The subsequent appearance of enlarged gastric veins (varices) is to be expected as a consequence of loss of the splenic vein but has not led to bleeding from these natural collaterals during long-term follow up.     

Distal pancreatic resection: technical differences between open and laparoscopic approaches

Open distal pancreatic resection has been performed over the years for management of patients with a variety of pancreatic disorders. However, the technique is usually not performed in the same way by all surgeons. In recent years, the laparoscopic approach has been introduced with all the advantages of a minimally invasive procedure. The primary differences between the open and laparoscopic approaches are the method of access, the method of exposure, and the extent of operative trauma. The clinical advantages of the laparoscopic approach are the reduced length hospitalization, the reduction in postoperative pain, absence of wound-related complications and faster recovery.     

The effect of mesh reinforcement of a stapled transection line on the rate of pancreatic occlusion failure after distal pancreatectomy: review of a single institution's experience

Background

Pancreatic occlusion failure (POF) after distal pancreatectomy remains a common source of morbidity. Here, we review our experience with distal pancreatectomy and attempt to identify factors which influence POF rates.

Patients and Methods

One hundred sixty-nine distal pancreatectomies were performed between 2002 and 2007. Review of the computerized medical records and physician office records was performed for all patients. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine factors which might influence the incidence of POF. The data set was analysed for factors which might influence the pancreatic occlusion rate. Analysis included patient and disease characteristics including: age, gender, body mass index (BMI), diagnosis, consistency of the pancreas and history of pancreatitis, as well as intra-operative variables including: surgeon, absorbable mesh reinforcement and operative approach.

Results

POF was the most common peri-operative complication. POF was identified in 32 out of 169 patients (19%). Transection technique (hand sewn, stapled, stapled with mesh) and procedure complexity were factors associated with differences in POF rates by both univariate and multivariate analyses. POF was identified in 7 out of 70 patients (10%) when an absorbable mesh was utilized, and 25 of 99 patients (25%) when mesh was not utilized (P < 0.02).

Discussion

These data suggest that a randomized controlled trial will be required to determine if mesh reinforcement reduces the rate and severity of POF after distal pancreatectomy.     

Successful treatment of pseudoaneurysms of celiac and superior mesenteric arteries by combined endovascular and surgical approach

Pseudoaneurysm after pancreas resection poses serious complications, including rupture and hemorrhage. Here we report a case of delayed massive hemorrhage from celiac and superior mesenteric arteries, which was successfully treated with a combined endovascular and surgical approach. The patient was a 52-year-old man who presented with pseudoaneurysms of the celiac and superior mesenteric arteries after distal pancreatectomy. Following the detection of sentinel bleeding from the abdominal drain, emergency angiography of the celiac and superior mesenteric arteries revealed stenosis of the celiac artery and pseudoaneurysms in the superior mesenteric artery. We occluded these lesions with a platinum coil, using an interventional radiological technique combined with bypass grafting between the abdominal aorta and the SMA, using the saphenous vein. However, re-bleeding into the abdominal cavity occurred from the proximal SMA pseudoaneurysm. We inserted an endoluminal stent-graft into the abdominal aorta and completed bypass grafting between the aorta and bilateral renal arteries. The hemorrhage ceased and the postoperative course was uneventful. The patient was discharged 34 days after the treatment (149 days after the initial operation). In conclusion, this combined endovascular and surgical approach is feasible and seems appropriate for pseudoaneurysms arising from proximal sites in visceral arteries.