Laparoscopic pancreatic resection: is it worthwhile?

Abstract

A series of 23 patients who had undergone an attempted laparoscopic Whipple (n = 10) or laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (n = 9) or laparoscopic enucleation (n = 4) since January 1992 were retrospectively reviewed. In the laparoscopic Whipple group (6 women and 4 men; mean age 71 [range 33 to 82] years), eight had malignant periampullary tumors and two had chronic pancreatitis. The rate of conversion to an open procedure was 40%, and complications were seen in the nonconverted group. The average operative time was 8.5 hours, and the hospital stay was 22.3 days. However, in the laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and enucleation groups, there were seven women and six men (mean age 46.5 [range 27 to 75] years). Of these, nine patients had a planned laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (8 for islet cell tumors and 1 for chronic pancreatitis) and four had a planned laparoscopic enucleation (all 4 for islet cell tumors). The conversion rate for these patients was 36%, and the mean operative time was 4.5 hours for laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and 3 hours for laparoscopic enucleation. The hospital stay was 5 days and 4 days, respectively. Although this series was small, no benefit seemed to be derived from the use of a complete laparoscopic Whipple procedure. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and enucleation were technically easier to perform and seemed to benefit patients by shortening their hospital stay with no recurrence of disease.