Minimally invasive enucleation versus open enucleation for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic neoplasms: Effects on clinical outcomes and quality of life.

Abstract

The efficacy and safety of minimally invasive pancreatic enucleation (PE) have rarely been investigated. This study aimed to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive enucleation (MIEn) with those of open enucleation (OEn) for benign/low-grade malignant pancreatic neoplasms. Data collected from patients who underwent PE between January 2011 and June 2020 at our centre were analysed. Forty-two patients who underwent MIEn (10 - robot-assisted and 32 - laparoscopic) and 47 who underwent OEn were included in this study. Compared with the OEn group, the MIEn group showed shorter operation time (147.6 ± 71.3 min vs. 183.1 ± 64.3 min), shorter post-operative hospital stay (11.5 ± 3.9 days vs. 13.4 ± 4.2 days), shorter off-bed activity time (2.9 ± 0.9 days vs. 3.7 ± 1.0 days) and lower estimated blood loss (EBL) (118.5 ± 59.2 mL vs. 153.1 ± 85.0 mL). Overall complication rate (47.6% vs. 55.3%), overall post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rate (40.5% vs. 44.7%) and Grade B + C POPF rate (11.9% vs. 19.1%) were similar in both the groups. For neoplasms located in the proximal pancreas, MIEn showed more favourable perioperative outcomes than OEn. Unlike MIEn for superficial neoplasms, MIEn for neoplasms deeply embedded in the pancreas resulted in a longer operative time and tended to increase EBL and the incidence of complications and POPF. During the follow-up period, no significant differences were observed between these two groups in terms of pancreatic function or quality of life. Compared to OEn, MIEn is effective and safe for patients with benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic neoplasms. However, MIEn for embedded pancreatic neoplasms is recommended only in experienced centres because of the high rates of complications and POPF.