A retrospective comparative study of robotic distal pancreatectomy with or without splenic vessel and spleen preservation

被引:2
作者
Lee, Kit Fai [1 ]
Chong, Charing Ching Ning [1 ]
Wong, John [1 ]
Cheung, Sunny Yue Sun [1 ]
Fung, Andrew Kai Yip [1 ]
Lok, Hon Ting [1 ]
Lo, Eugene Yee Juen [1 ]
Lai, Paul Bo San [1 ]
机构
[1] Chinese Univ Hong Kong, Prince Wales Hosp, Dept Surg, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
来源
SURGEON-JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL COLLEGES OF SURGEONS OF EDINBURGH AND IRELAND | 2022年 / 20卷 / 03期
关键词
Distal pancreatectomy; Splenectomy; Spleen preservation; Splenic vessel preservation; Robotic pancreatectomy; LAPAROSCOPIC SPLEEN; CONSERVATION; PROPOSAL;
D O I
10.1016/j.surge.2021.02.004
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Robotic distal pancreatectomy has been accepted to be safe and effective for pancreatic tail lesion. Whether spleen preservation by preserving the splenic vessels with robot assistance is feasible and beneficial remains controversial. Here we would like to compare the operative outcomes of robotic distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy (DPS) with robotic spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy by means of splenic vessel preserMethods: Between March 2011 and September 2019, 56 consecutive patients undergoing robotic distal pancreatectomy were identified, with 28 patients in each group. Patient demographics, histopathology findings and operative outcomes were prospectively collected and compared between the two groups. A subgroup analysis was made after excluding malignant and pancreatic lesions >6 cm in the DPS group. Results: The two groups had similar conversion rate, blood loss, morbidity and pancreatic fistula rate. There was no operative mortality. The SVP group had shorter median operative time (245 vs 303.5 min, P = 0.019) and shorter median hospital stay (5 vs 6 days, P = 0.019) than the DPS group. However, all malignant lesions occurred in the DPS group and lesion size in DPS group was significantly larger. After matching, there were 28 SVP and 15 DPS. The histopathology findings and lesion size became comparable. The SVP group still had shorter operative time (245 vs 290 min, P = 0.022) and shorter hospital stay (5 vs 7 days, P = 0.014) than the DPS group. Conclusion: Apart from avoiding risk of overwhelming postsplenectomy sepsis, robotic SVP had additional advantage of shorter operative time and shorter hospital stay than robotic ?? 2021 Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh (Scottish charity number SC005317) and Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:129 / 136
页数:8
相关论文
共 23 条
  • [1] Postoperative pancreatic fistula: An international study group (ISGPF) definition
    Bassi, C
    Dervenis, C
    Butturini, G
    Fingerhut, A
    Yeo, C
    Izbicki, J
    Neoptolemos, J
    Sarr, M
    Traverso, W
    Buchler, M
    [J]. SURGERY, 2005, 138 (01) : 8 - 13
  • [2] Robotic approach improves spleen-preserving rate and shortens postoperative hospital stay of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a matched cohort study
    Chen, Shi
    Zhan, Qian
    Chen, Jiang-zhi
    Jin, Jia-bin
    Deng, Xia-xing
    Chen, Hao
    Shen, Bai-yong
    Peng, Cheng-hong
    Li, Hong-wei
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2015, 29 (12): : 3507 - 3518
  • [3] Classification of surgical complications - A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey
    Dindo, D
    Demartines, N
    Clavien, PA
    [J]. ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2004, 240 (02) : 205 - 213
  • [4] A comparison between robotic-assisted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy
    Goh, Brian K. P.
    Chan, Chung Yip
    Soh, Hui-Ling
    Lee, Ser Yee
    Cheow, Peng-Chung
    Chow, Pierce K. H.
    Ooi, London L. P. J.
    Chung, Alexander Y. F.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ROBOTICS AND COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY, 2017, 13 (01)
  • [5] Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: an up-to-date meta-analysis
    Guerrini, Gian Piero
    Lauretta, Andrea
    Belluco, Claudio
    Olivieri, Matteo
    Forlin, Marco
    Basso, Stefania
    Breda, Bruno
    Bertola, Giulio
    Di Benedetto, Fabrizio
    [J]. BMC SURGERY, 2017, 17
  • [6] Robot-assisted spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: a single surgeon's experiences and proposal of clinical application
    Hwang, Ho Kyoung
    Kang, Chang Moo
    Chung, Young Eun
    Kim, Kyung Ah
    Choi, Sung Hoon
    Lee, Woo Jung
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2013, 27 (03): : 774 - 781
  • [7] Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with conservation of the splenic artery and vein
    Kimura, W
    Inoue, T
    Futakawa, N
    Shinkai, H
    Han, I
    Muto, T
    [J]. SURGERY, 1996, 120 (05) : 885 - 890
  • [8] Current status of robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy: A comprehensive review
    Lai, Eric C. H.
    Chung Ngai Tang
    [J]. ASIAN JOURNAL OF ENDOSCOPIC SURGERY, 2013, 6 (03) : 158 - 164
  • [9] Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: A propensity score-matched study
    Liu, Rong
    Liu, Qu
    Zhao, Zhi-Ming
    Tan, Xiang-Long
    Gao, Yuan-Xing
    Zhao, Guo-Dong
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2017, 116 (04) : 461 - 469
  • [10] Overwhelming postsplenectomy infection
    Lynch, AM
    Kapila, R
    [J]. INFECTIOUS DISEASE CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 1996, 10 (04) : 693 - &