Spleen-preserving Distal Pancreatectomy Group Research Articles

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.

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.

Effect of Spleen Preservation on the Occurrence of Sepsis in Patients Who Underwent Distal Pancreatectomy: A Population-Based, Propensity Score Matching Study

Background: To investigate the long-term effects of splenectomy on sepsis occurrence in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy. Splenectomy is associated with sepsis and other severe infections. Splenic preservation has been advocated during distal pancreatectomy for benign or borderline pancreatic diseases. To date, no population-based study has investigated the risk of sepsis occurrence with regard to splenectomy in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy. Methods: In this population-based study, the Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service (HIRA) database was used to identify patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy between 2010 and 2014. After propensity score matching, the variables that affect sepsis occurrence were analysed between the spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) and the conventional distal pancreatectomy (CDP) groups. Findings: A total of 5,613 patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy were included in the HIRA database (2,560 splenectomised patients and 3,053 spleen-preserved patients). We matched 2,262 splenectomised patients to 2,262 spleen-preserved patients. No significant difference was observed in the rate of sepsis occurrence between the SPDP and CDP groups. Interpretation: Compared to spleen-preservation, splenectomy during distal pancreatectomy is not related to an increased likelihood of long-term sepsis. Thus, preservation of the spleen during distal pancreatectomy may not be mandatory in patients with benign pancreatic disease. However, further population-based studies are warranted to analyse the role of spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy in other outcomes. Funding Information: This study received no financial support. Declaration of Interests: All authors declare no competing interests. Ethics Approval Statement: This study was approved by institutional review board of Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital (HKS 2018-11-013), and the need for informed consent from each patient was waived because the authors did not have access to identifiable information.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Central Pancreatectomy versus Spleen-Preserving Distal Pancreatectomy: A Comparative Analysis of Early and Late Postoperative Outcomes

Background/Aim: The aim of the present study is to compare the postoperative and long-term outcomes of central pancreatectomy (CP) and spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP). Methods: Clinical, pathological and long-term data were compared between 22 patients who underwent CP and 25 patients who underwent SPDP (2002–2012). Results: The median length of resected pancreas was 8.5 cm in the SPDP group and 5 cm in the CP group (p < 0.001). The median estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the CP group (p = 0.019). Morbidity was 50% for CPs and 40% for SPDPs (p = 0.564). The rate of pancreatic fistulae was 36% for CPs and 40% for SPDPs (p = 0.530). The rate of new-onset diabetes was nil in the successful CP group and 16% in the SPDP group (p = 0.111). Conclusion: Morbidity and pancreatic fistula rates are not higher after CP when compared to SPDP. The loss of normal pancreatic tissue is significantly lower for CP, and thus there is potentially better preservation of the pancreatic endocrine functions. CP should be considered only in selected cases when preservation of the pancreas is of utmost importance, especially for lesions situated at the level of the pancreatic neck.

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.