Distal Pancreatectomy With Splenectomy Research Articles

Linking factors to incisional hernia following pancreatic surgery: a 14-year retrospective analysis.

Incisional hernias (IH) are a significant postoperative complication with profound implications for patient morbidity and healthcare costs. The relationship between IH and perioperative factors in pancreatic surgery,with particular attention to preoperative biliary stents and pancreatic fistulasrequires further exploration. This retrospective observational study examined adult patients who underwent open pancreatic surgeries via midline incision at a high-volume tertiary hepatopancreatobiliary center from January 2008 to December 2021. The study focused on IH incidence and associated risk factors, with particular attention to preoperative biliary stents and pancreatic fistulas. In a cohort of 620 individuals undergoing pancreatic surgery, 351 had open surgery with at least one-year follow-up. Within a median follow-up of 794days (IQR 1694-537), the overall incidence of IH was 17.38%. The highest frequency of IH was observed among patients who had a Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Significant predictors for the development of IH within the entire study population in a multivariable analysis included perioperative biliary stenting (OR 2.05; 95% CI 1.06-3.96; p = 0.03), increased age at diagnosis (OR 2.05; 95% CI 1.06-3.96; p = 0.01), and BMI (OR 1.08; 95% CI 1.01-1.15; p = 0.01). In the subset of patients who underwent Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), although the presence of biliary stents was associated with a heightened occurrence of SSIs, it did not demonstrate a direct correlation with an increased incidence of incisional hernias (IH). The development of pancreatic fistulas did not show a significant correlation with IH in either the Distal Pancreatectomy with Splenectomy (DPS) or the PD patient groups. The study underscores a notable association between biliary stent placement and increased IH risk after PD, mediated by elevated SSI incidence. Pancreatic fistulas were not directly correlated with IH in the studied cohorts. Further research is necessary to validate these findings and guide clinical practice.

Minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: real-world data from the Italian National Registry of Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (IGoMIPS)

Aim: Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy has become the standard of care for benign and low malignant lesions. Spleen preservation in this setting has been proposed to reduce surgical trauma and long-term sequelae. The aim of the current study is to present real-world data on indications, techniques, and outcomes of spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP). Methods: Patients who underwent SPDP and distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPWS) were extracted from the 2019-2022 Italian National Registry for Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (IGoMIPS). Perioperative and pathological data were collected. Results: One hundred and ten patients underwent SPDP and five hundred and seventy-eight underwent DPWS. Patients undergoing SPDP were significantly younger (56 vs. 63.5 years; P < 0.001). Seventy-six percent of SPDP cases were performed in six out of thirty-four IGoMIPS centers. SPDP was performed predominantly for Neuroendocrine Tumors (43.6% vs.23.5%; P < 0.001) and for smaller lesions (T1 57.6% vs. 29.8%; P < 0.001). The conversion rate was higher in the case of DPWS (7.6% vs. 0.9%; P = 0.006), even when pancreatic cancer was ruled out (5.0% vs. 0.9%; P = 0.045). The robotic approach was most commonly used for SPDP (50.9% vs. 29.7%; P < 0.001). No difference in postoperative outcomes and length of stay was observed between the two groups, as well as between robotic and laparoscopic approaches in the SPDP group. A trend toward a lower rate of postoperative sepsis was observed after SPDP (0.9% vs. 5.2%; P = 0.056). In 84.7% of SPDP, splenic vessels were preserved (Kimura procedure) without an impact on short-term postoperative outcomes. Conclusion: In this registry analysis, SPDP was feasible and safe. The Kimura procedure was prevalent over the Warshaw procedure. The typical patient undergoing SPDP was young with a neuroendocrine tumor at an early stage. Robotic assistance was used more frequently for SPDP than for DPWS.

Organ-Sparing Pancreatectomy for Benign or Low-Grade Malignant Pancreatic Tumors: A Single-Center Experience with 101 Consecutive Patients.

BackgroundPancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS) are considered the standard procedures for pancreatic lesions. However, long-term metabolic consequences of PD and DPS applied for benign or low-grade malignant tumors need to be addressed. This study aimed to investigate the short- and long-term outcomes of organ-sparing pancreatectomy for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors in our institution.Material/MethodsThe clinical data of 101 patients with benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors who underwent organ-sparing pancreatectomy from January 2009 to September 2021 were retrospectively analyzed, including 40 tumor enucleations (EN), 22 central pancreatectomies (CP), 25 spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomies (SPDP), 7 pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomies (PPPD) and 7 duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resections (DPPHR).ResultsThe mean operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay were 182.9±74.6 min, 191.9±127.8 mL, and 11.6±8.1 days, respectively. EN had the shortest operative time, while DPPHR had the longest operative time. The mean intraoperative blood loss of DPPHR and PPPD was significantly greater than the others (all P<0.05). The length of hospital stay of PPPD was longest. The overall morbidity was 33.6%. The reoperation rate was 1.0% and there was no mortality. The incidence of pancreatic endocrine insufficiency and exocrine insufficiency were 5.9% and 6.9%, respectively. None patients had tumor recurrence during the follow-up period.ConclusionsOrgan-sparing pancreatectomy is associated with acceptable perioperative risk and postoperative complications and better long-term outcomes in the aspects of preservation of function and curability in benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors.

Values of spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy in well-differentiated non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a comparative study.

BackgroundThe feasibility of spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) to treat well-differentiated non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NF-pNETs) located at the body and/or tail of the pancreas remains controversial. Distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS) has been widely applied in the treatment of NF-pNETs; however, it may increase the post-operative morbidities. This study aimed to evaluate whether SPDP is inferior to DPS in post-operative outcomes and survivals when being used to treat patients with NF-pNETs in our institute.MethodsClinicopathological features of patients with NF-pNETs who underwent curative SPDP or DPS at the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University (Guangzhou, China) between January 2010 and January 2022 were collected. Short-term outcomes and 5-year survivals were compared between patients undergoing SPDP and those undergoing DPS.ResultsSixty-three patients (SPDP, 27; DPS, 36) with well-differentiated NF-pNETs were enrolled. All patients had grade 1/2 tumors. After identifying patients with T1–T2 NF-pNETs (SPDP, 27; DPS, 15), there was no disparity between the SPDP and DPS groups except for tumor size (median, 1.4 vs 2.6 cm, P = 0.001). There were no differences in operation time (median, 250 vs 295 min, P = 0.478), intraoperative blood loss (median, 50 vs 100 mL, P = 0.145), post-operative major complications (3.7% vs 13.3%, P = 0.287), clinically relevant post-operative pancreatic fistula (22.2% vs 6.7%, P = 0.390), or post-operative hospital stays (median, 9 vs 9 days, P = 0.750) between the SPDP and DPS groups. Kaplan–Meier curve showed no significant differences in the 5-year overall survival rate (100% vs 100%, log-rank P > 0.999) or recurrence-free survival (100% vs 100%, log-rank P > 0.999) between patients with T1–T2 NF-pNETs undergoing SPDP and those undergoing DPS.ConclusionsIn patients with T1–T2 well-differentiated NF-pNETs, SPDP could achieve comparable post-operative outcomes and prognosis compared with DPS.

Proximal versus distal resection in adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic neck: does it matter?

Presenter: Shelby L Allen MD | Indiana University Background: Adenocarcinoma isolated to the neck of the pancreas is relatively uncommon, and tumors in this location present a unique challenge to the surgeon. Surgical resection can be done in the form of either a pancreatoduodenctomy or a distal pancreatectomy, depending on specific tumor and patient characteristics. The aim of this study was to explore current practices as well as evaluate surgical and oncologic outcomes for patients undergoing pancreatic resection for cancers of the pancreatic neck. Methods: This was a case series of patients treated at a single institution. NSQIP data was obtained on all patients undergoing pancreatic resection for malignant tumors of the pancreas at our institution from 2013 to 2020. Because a specific CPT code does not exist for neck-based tumors, chart review was utilized to identify cases of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma of the neck based on surgeon operative reports and surgical pathology reports. The pancreatic neck was defined as the parenchyma anterior to the superior mesenteric vessels, and between the gastroduodenal artery (GDA) and left border of the superior mesenteric artery. Tumors that involved the neck but that extended into the head or body of the pancreas, or that encased the GDA, were excluded from the analysis. Patients were then divided into groups based on type of resection (pancreatoduodenectomy vs. distal pancreatectomy) and outcomes were compared between the two groups. Data were analyzed using Fisher’s exact test, Mann-Whitney-U test and equality of medians as appropriate. Results: Of a total of 720 patients undergoing surgery for malignant neoplasm of the pancreas, 9 patients had ductal adenocarcinoma isolated to the neck of the pancreas. Four patients (44%) underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and 5 patients (56%) underwent distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS). All patients undergoing PD received some form of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, while only 2 patients undergoing DPS (40%) received neoadjuvant treatment. The mean lymph node harvest was 24 in the PD group vs 20 in the DPS group (p=0.556). The incidence of nodal metastases (N1 disease or higher) was similar between the two groups (50% in PD group vs 40% in DPS group, p=0.99). One patient in the PD group had invasive carcinoma at the final pancreatic margin, and two patients in the DPS group had positive pancreatic margins (25% vs. 40%, p=0.52). The mean overall survival (OS) was 14.9 months in the PD group vs 11.4 months in the DPS group (p=0.57). Conclusion: There is no significant difference in oncologic outcomes between pancreatoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy for patients with ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic neck. The decision regarding type of resection to perform should be individualized based on patient factors, tumor characteristics and surgeon experience.

Dynamic hematological changes in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy with or without splenectomy: a population-based cohort study

BackgroundThe clinical outcomes of patients who received distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS) and spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) have been generally investigated. However, postoperative hematological changes after distal pancreatectomy with or without splenectomy are poorly understood.MethodsInformation from patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy (DP) between January 2014 and June 2019 at a single institution was reviewed. A linear mixed-effects model was used to compare dynamic hematological changes between different groups.ResultsA total of 302 patients who underwent DP were enrolled. In the long term, most postoperative hematological parameters remained significantly higher than preoperative levels in the DPS group, while postoperative lymphocyte, monocyte, basophil, and platelet levels returned to preoperative levels in the SPDP group. All postoperative hematological parameters except for red blood cell count and serum hemoglobulin level were significantly higher in the DPS group than in the SPDP group. There were no significant differences in hematological changes between the splenic vessel preservation (SVP) and Warshaw technique (WT) groups.ConclusionsPostoperative hematological changes were significantly different between the DPS and SPDP groups. Compared to DPS, SPDP reduced abnormal hematological changes caused by splenectomy. SVP and WT were comparable in terms of postoperative hematological changes.

Postoperative risk of pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy with or without spleen preservation.

Outcomes after distal pancreatectomy with or without splenectomy are controversial. The present study aims to investigate differences in short-term and long-term outcomes between spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) and distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS). In this retrospective review of consecutive patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy with or without splenectomy from January 2011 until December 2017 for benign disease, the primary endpoint was to compare postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The secondary endpoint was to compare duration of surgery, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and long-term outcomes. Patients undergoing SPDP had a lower rate of POPF (13.6% vs 46.1%; p = 0.02). Patients undergoing SPDP (n = 22) were discharged earlier than patients undergoing DPS (n = 26) (8 [4-29] vs 12 [6.48] days; p = 0.003). No differences in other intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were found between groups. Patients undergoing SPDP developed fewer POPF and were discharged earlier compared to patients undergoing DPS.

Distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic neoplasia: is splenectomy really necessary? A bicentric retrospective analysis of surgical specimens

BackgroundWhile distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS) is the reference treatment for pancreatic body and tail neoplasia, oncological benefits of splenectomy have never been demonstrated. Involvement of spleen, splenic hilum and lymph nodes (LN) was therefore assessed on DPS specimens. MethodsAll DPS pancreatic neoplasia specimens obtained in 2 Brussels University Hospitals over 15 years (2004–2018) were reviewed retrospectively, using both preoperative radiological imaging and postoperative pathological analyses of splenic parenchyma, hilar tissue and LN. ResultsThe total of 130 DPS specimens included 85 adenocarcinomas, 37 neuroendocrine neoplasms and 8 other carcinomas. Tumours involved the pancreatic body without tail invasion for 59 specimens (B, Body group), and the pancreatic tail with/without body for 71 (T, Tail group). At pathology, direct splenic and/or hilar involvement was observed in 13 T specimens (13/71, 18.3%), but in none belonging to the Body group. The observed numbers of splenic hilar LN (only reported in 49/130 patients) were low, only one T adenocarcinoma had positive splenic LN in addition to direct splenic involvement. ConclusionSplenectomy remains justified during pancreatectomy for neoplasia involving the pancreatic tail, but in case of pancreatic body tumours, its benefits should be questioned in the light of absent splenic LN/parenchymal involvement.

Long-Term Outcomes after Spleen-Preserving Distal Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Results from the US Neuroendocrine Study Group

Background: The adoption of spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) for malignant disease such as pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) has been controversial. The objective of the current study was to assess the impact of SPDP on outcomes of patients with pNETs. Methods: Patients undergoing a distal pancreatectomy for pNET between 2002 and 2016 were identified in the US Neuroendocrine Tumor Study Group database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to compare short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing SPDP versus distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS). Results: Among 621 patients, 103 patients (16.6%) underwent an SPDP. Patients who underwent SPDP were more likely to have lower BMI (median, 27.5 [IQR 24.0–31.2] vs. 28.7 [IQR 25.7–33.6]; p = 0.005) and have undergone minimally invasive surgery (n = 56, 54.4% vs. n = 185, 35.7%; p < 0.001). After PSM, while the median total number of lymph nodes examined among patients who underwent an SPDP was lower compared with DPS (3 [IQR 1–8] vs. 9 [5–13]; p < 0.001), 5-year overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were comparable (OS: 96.8 vs. 92.0%, log-rank p = 0.21, RFS: 91.1 vs. 84.7%, log-rank p = 0.93). In addition, patients undergoing SPDP had less intraoperative blood loss (median, 100 mL [IQR 10–250] vs. 150 mL [IQR 100–400]; p = 0.001), lower incidence of serious complications (n = 13, 12.8% vs. n = 28, 27.5%; p = 0.014), and shorter length of stay (median: 5 days [IQR 4–7] vs. 6 days [IQR 5–13]; p = 0.049) compared with patients undergoing DPS. Conclusion: SPDP for pNET was associated with acceptable perioperative and long-term outcomes that were comparable to DPS. SPDP should be considered for patients with pNET.

Leukocytosis after distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy as a marker of major complication

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to analyze the associations between the degree of postoperative leukocytosis and major morbidity after elective distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS). MethodsRetrospective review of patients undergoing DPS for pancreatic diseases (2013–2016). Receiver operating characteristic curves, Youden’s index, and area under the curve were used to identify ideal lab cut-off values and discriminatory ability of postoperative white blood cell count to detect complications. Results158 patients underwent DPS. Median age was 57 years (range, 22–90) and 53% of patients were male. POD3 absolute WBC count ≥16 × 109/L or an increase in WBC count ≥9 × 109/L from preoperative baseline was associated with major morbidity after DPS (AUC 0.7 and 0.7, respectively). ConclusionPostoperative day three leukocytosis ≥16 × 109/L or an increase in WBC of ≥9 × 109/L from preoperative baseline should raise clinical awareness for major postoperative complication after DPS.

Evolution of Laparoscopic Pancreatic Resections for Pancreatic and Periampullary Diseases: Perioperative Outcomes of 605 Patients at a High-Volume Center

Background: Laparoscopic pancreatectomy (LP) is increasingly performed with several institutional series and comparative studies reported. We have applied LP to a variety of pancreatic resections since 2004. This article is to report results of 15-year practice of 605 LPs for pancreatic and periampullary diseases. Methods: Patients with benign or malignant diseases in the pancreas and periampullary region, who underwent LP from June 2004 to June 2018, were retrospectively reviewed. The demographics and indications, and intraoperative and perioperative outcomes were evaluated. Results: A total of 605 consecutive LPs were analyzed, including 237 (39.2%) distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS), 116 (19.2%) spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP), 30 (5.0%) enucleation (EN), 30 (5.0%) central pancreatectomy (CP), 186 (30.7%) pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), and 6 (1.0%) pancreatoduodenectomy with total pancreatectomy (PDTP). The most common pathologic finding was pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (146, 24.1%). Conversion to open procedure was required in 22 patients (3.6%) (12 with PD, 8 with DPS, 1 with CP, and 1 with PDTP). The mean operative time was 241.5 ± 105.5 minutes (range 50-550 minutes) for the entire population and 367.1 ± 61.8 minutes (range 230-550 minutes) for PD. Clinically significant pancreatic fistula (ISGPF grade B and C) rate was 12.4% for the entire cohort and 16.1% for PD. Rate of Clavien-Dindo III-V complications was 17.4% for the entire cohort and 23.7% for PD. Ninety-day mortality was observed only in the cohort of patients undergoing PD (n = 4). Conclusions: The LP procedure appears to be technically safe and feasible, with an acceptable rate of morbidity when performed at our experienced, high-volume center. However, PD has less favorable outcomes and needs further evaluation.

Minimally invasive preservation versus splenectomy during distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) has gained in popularity recently. However, there is no consensus on whether to preserve the spleen or not. In this study, we compared MIDP outcomes between spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) and distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS); as well as outcomes between splenic vessel preservation (SVP) and Warshaw's technique (WT). A systematic search of PubMed (MEDLINE) and Cochrane Library was conducted and the reference lists of review articles were hand-searched. Fifteen relevant studies with 769 patients were selected for meta-analyses of DPS and SPDP, while another 15 studies with 841 patients were used for the analysis between SVP and WT. Compared with the DPS group, SPDP patients had significantly lower incidences of infectious complications (P=0.006) and pancreatic fistula (P=0.002), shorter operative time (P<0.001), and less blood loss (P=0.01). Compared with WT, SVP patients had significantly lower incidences of splenic infarction (P<0.001) and secondary splenectomy (P=0.003). Subanalysis for laparoscopic surgery alone had similar results. Based on this study, SPDP has significantly superior outcomes compared to DPS. When a spleen is preserved, SVP has better outcomes over WT for reducing splenic complications.

Is distal pancreatectomy with en-bloc celiac axis resection effective for patients with locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma? -Multicenter surgical group study

ObjectivesWe retrospectively investigated the operative outcomes of patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy (DP) for invasive pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) located at the body and tail. MethodsData from 395 patients with PDAC who underwent DP with margin-negative resection (R0 or R1) were collected from seven high-volume centers in Japan from 2001 to 2012. Among them, 72 patients underwent DP with en-bloc celiac axis resection (DP-CAR). The remaining 323 patients underwent conventional DP with splenectomy (DP-S). To determine the efficacy of DP-CAR, clinicopathological data were compared between the DP-CAR and the DP-S groups. ResultsThe DP-S group consisted mainly of patients with resectable disease (93%), and conversely, all patients in the DP-CAR group had borderline resectable or unresectable disease. The overall morbidity was significantly higher in the DP-CAR group than in the DP-S group (63% vs 47%, respectively; P = 0.017). The median survival time (MST) of the DP-CAR group was significantly shorter than that of the DP-S group (17.5 vs 28.6 months, respectively; P = 0.004). However, the MST of patients in the DP-CAR group (n = 61, 85%) who received adjuvant therapy was significantly longer than that of patients in the DP-S group (n = 65, 20%) who underwent R1 resection (21.9 vs 16.7 months, respectively; P = 0.024). ConclusionDP-CAR followed by adjuvant chemotherapy provided an acceptable overall survival rate in patients with highly advanced PDAC, but should be performed with great caution because of high morbidity. Patients with a high risk of positive surgical margins with DP-S may be candidates for DP-CAR.

Hypercoagulability after distal pancreatectomy: Just meaningless alterations?

BackgroundPerioperative and short-term postoperative parameters are similar comparing spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) and distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS). But there are no sound data evaluating the long term risk of postoperative thromboses and infectious complications after splenectomy. The present study evaluated whether the coagulation status differs in patients after SPDP and DPS, and whether that matters clinically. MethodsA total of 41 patients after DP (SPDP = 20; DPS = 21) were followed up, focusing on alterations of patient coagulation and immune status. To assess kinetics of the coagulation process, qualitative tests (multiple platelet function analyzer, rotational thrombelastography) were used in addition to global coagulation tests. ResultsCoagulation tests revealed a significant enhanced tendency for blood-platelet aggregation and coagulation activation in patients after DPS compared to patients after SPDP. No septic or thromboembolic events were observed in any patient. ConclusionHypercoagulability in splenectomized patients persists over years. Thus, a correlation of this finding with thromboembolic events and mortality years after splenectomy should to be performed in a large cohort.

Distal pancreatectomy for benign and low grade malignant tumors: Short-term postoperative outcomes of spleen preservation-A systematic review and update meta-analysis.

The value of spleen preservation with distal pancreatectomy (DP) for benign and low grade malignant tumors remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term postoperative clinical outcomes in patients undergoing DP with splenectomy (DPS) or spleen preservation (SPDP). Online database search was performed (2000 to present); key bibliographies were reviewed. Studies comparing patients undergoing DP with either DPS or SPDP, and assessing postoperative complications were included. Meta-analysis of included data showed SPDP patients had significantly less operative blood loss, shorter duration of hospitalization, lower incidence of fluid collection and abscess, lower incidence of postoperative splenic and portal vein thrombosis, and lower incidence of new onset postoperative diabetes. For the whole group, there was no difference in incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (RR = 0.95; 95%CI 0.65-1.40, P = 0.80), however, subgroup analysis of studies using ISGPF criteria showed that DPS patients had increased rates of Grade B/C POPF (RR = 1.35; 95%CI 1.08-1.70, P = 0.01). SPDP for benign and low grade malignant tumors is associated with shorter hospital stay and decreased morbidity compared to DPS. J. Surg. Oncol. 2017;115:137-143. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Spleen-preserving Distal Pancreatectomy or Distal Pancreatectomy With Splenectomy?

Goals:We designed this study to evaluate the efficacy of spleen salvage during distal pancreatectomy for patients with benign and borderline malignant tumors.Background:Despite the emphasis on its role, the spleen has commonly been removed in distal pancreatectomy.Study:From January 2005 to July 2009, 82 patients underwent distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS) and 78 patients underwent spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP). Medical records were retrospectively reviewed.Results:There were no significant differences in demographics, final diagnoses, estimated blood loss, intraoperative transfusion, and operative time between the 2 groups. More perioperative complications occurred in the DPS group than in the SPDP group (P=0.0344). Consequently, postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the SPDP group than in the DPS group (P=0.0273). In the follow-up survey, episodes of common cold or flu were apparently more frequent in the DPS group (P=0.047). More patients in the DPS group felt fatigue (P=0.0481) and poor health condition (P=0.0371). Less newly developed (P=0.0193) and aggravated diabetes mellitus (P=0.0361) were also observed in the SPDP group. Platelet counts on postoperative day (POD) 5, hemoglobin on POD 3, WBC counts, and CRP level on POD 2 were significantly higher in the DPS group than in the SPDP group and these differences continued to be significant for months after surgery.Conclusions:In addition to frequent higher grade complications, prolonged hospital stays, and severe hematological abnormalities, DPS seemed to result in poor health condition based on the follow-up survey. Even an effort to preserve an adult spleen in distal pancreatectomy is worthwhile.

Clinical Comparison of Distal Pancreatectomy with or without Splenectomy: A Meta-Analysis

ObjectiveA distal pancreatectomy has routinely been used for removing benign/borderline malignant tumors of the body and tail of the pancreas; however, controversy exists whether or not the spleen should be saved. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis for comparing the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy with or without splenectomy.MethodsA literature research from the databases of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library was performed to evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes between spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) and distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS). Pooled odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated using fixed-effects or random-effects models.ResultsEleven non-randomized controlled studies involving 897 patients were selected to satisfy the inclusion criteria; 355 patients underwent SPDP and 542 patients underwent DPS. Compared with DPS, SPDP required a shorter hospital stay (WMD = 1.16, 95% CI = −2.00 to −0.31, P = 0.007), and had a lower incidence of intra-abdominal abscesses (OR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.27 to 0.83, P = 0.009). In addition, spleen infarctions occurred in SPDP, most of which involved use of the Warshaw method for preserving the spleen. There were no differences between the SPDP and DPS groups with respect to operative time, operative blood loss, requirement for blood transfusion, pancreatic fistulas, thromboses, post-operative bleeding, wound infections and re-operation rates.ConclusionSPDP should be performed due to the benefits of the immune system and quick post-operative recovery. It is also essential to preserve the splenic artery and vein. Large randomized controlled trials are further needed to verify the results of this meta-analysis.

Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: perioperative and long-term outcome analysis.

Despite the emphasis on its role, the spleen has commonly been removed in distal pancreatectomy. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of spleen salvage during distal pancreatectomy for patients with benign and borderline malignant tumors. 82 patients underwent distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS) and 78 patients underwent spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP). Medical records were retrospectively reviewed. There were no significant differences in demographics, final diagnoses estimated blood loss, intraoperative transfusion and operative time between the two groups. More perioperative complications occurred in DPS group than in the SPDP group (p = 0.0344). Consequently, postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in SPDP group than in DPS group (p = 0.0273). On the follow-up survey, episodes of common cold or flu were apparently more frequent in the DPS group (p = 0.047). More patients in the DPS group felt fatigue (p = 0.0481) and poorer health condition (p = 0.0371). Less newly developed (p = 0.0193) and aggravated diabetes mellitus (p = 0.0361) were also observed in SPDP group. In addition to frequent higher-grade complications, and prolonged hospital stays, DPS appeared to result in poorer health condition based on follow-up survey. Even an effort to preserve adult spleen in distal pancreatectomy is worthwhile.

Hematological benefits after spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: perioperative and long-term outcome analysis.

Despite the emphasis on its role, the spleen has commonly been removed in distal pancreatectomy. We designed this study to evaluate the efficacy of spleen salvage during distal pancreatectomy for patients with benign and borderline malignant tumors. From January 2005 to July 2009, 82 patients underwent distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS) and 78 patients underwent spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP). Medical records were retrospectively reviewed. The demographics and final diagnoses were similar between the two groups. There were no significant differences in estimated blood loss, intraoperative transfusion and operative time between the two groups. More perioperative complications occurred in DPS group than in the SPDP group (p = 0.0344). Consequently, postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in SPDP group than in DPS group (p = 0.0273). Platelet counts on postoperative day (POD) 5, hemoglobin on POD 3, WBC counts and CRP level on POD 2 were significantly higher in the DPS group than in the SPDP group and these differences continued to be significant for months after surgery. In addition to frequent higher-grade complications, prolonged hospital stays, DPS appeared to result in severer hematological abnormalities. Even an effort to preserve adult spleen in distal pancreatectomy is worthwhile.

Distal pancreatectomy with or without splenectomy: comparison of postoperative outcomes and surrogates of splenic function

ObjectivesPublished data on splenic preservation during distal pancreatectomy have been inconsistent. We hypothesized that patients undergoing spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) would have fewer infectious and non-infectious complications than those undergoing en bloc distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS), and that their haematological parameters would be consistent with splenic function. MethodsOf 97 patients who underwent either SPDP using the Warshaw technique or en bloc DPS, 78 met our study inclusion criteria. Records were reviewed for data on age, gender, resection, indications for resection, operative time, blood loss, transfusion requirements, hospital stay, infectious complications, any other complications, postoperative white blood cell (WBC) and platelet counts. Data were analysed using the chi-squared test, the two-sided Mann–Whitney–Wilcoxon text, and simple and multiple logistic regression analyses. A P-value of <0.05 was considered significant. ResultsPatients undergoing SPDP had a shorter length of stay and shorter operative time, were more likely to be completed laparoscopically, less likely to require re-operation, and had fewer infectious and non-infectious complications. However, these differences were not statistically significant. In multiple logistic regression analyses, patient age and length of hospital stay were both significant predictors of the occurrence of non-infectious complications (P= 0.04 and P= 0.006, respectively). Blood transfusion was a significant predictor of postoperative morbidity (P= 0.013 for infectious complications; P= 0.018 for non-infectious complications). White blood cell count was a statistically significant predictor of infectious (P= 0.02) and non-infectious (P= 0.04) complications, whereas platelet count was not. Patients who underwent DPS had statistically significantly higher WBC and platelet counts immediately postoperatively and at 6 months compared with SPDP patients. Postoperative mortality in both the SPDP and DPS groups was 0%. None of the 30 SPDP patients had evidence of splenic infarction. Pancreatic leaks occurred in 18% of patients in the SPDP group, compared with 8% in the DPS group (P < 0.05). ConclusionsSpleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy using the Warshaw technique is associated with lower postoperative morbidity than DPS. Lower WBC and platelet counts suggest better splenic function in SPDP patients.