Robotic spleen-preserving laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a single-centered Chinese experience

World Journal of Surgical Oncology

Jia-Hong Dong¹  Shao-Cheng Lv¹  Xian-Qiang Wang¹  Ying Luo¹  Hong-Guang Wang¹  Wen-Bin Ji¹  Yang Liu¹ 

[1] Hepatobiliary Department, PLA General Hospital of China, Beijing 100853, China

关键词: Minimally invasive surgery;    Spleen preservation;    Distal pancreatectomy;    Laparoscopy;    Robotic surgery;   

Others  :  1225475
DOI  :  10.1186/s12957-015-0671-x

 received in 2015-06-03, accepted in 2015-08-03,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Spleen-preserving laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is technically challenging. New surgical robotic systems are now available and show promising outcomes but were very recently implemented in China.

Methods

Seven patients underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy using the da Vinci Robotic System (RDP) for benign or borderline malignant pancreatic tumors. Spleen preservation rate, blood loss, and operative complications were assessed.

Results

Mean age was 44.6 ± 13.7 years. Surgery was uneventful in all patients, without conversion to laparotomy. The surgical time (including anesthesia induction, robot docking, operation, and postoperative awaking time) was 460 ± 154 min, while the operation time was 368 ± 126 min. Blood losses were 200 ± 110 mL. The minor (Clavien I+II) complication rate was 14.3 %, and the major (Clavien III+IV) complication rate was 14.3 %, including hemorrhage and pancreatic leakage. The spleen preservation rate was 100 %. All complications were successfully managed and cured. Intraoperative laparoscopic ultrasound examination successfully identified the correct surgical resection margins. Mean postoperative hospitalization was 8.7 ± 6.6 days. No patient had to undergo a second pancreas surgery. Patients were followed up for a median of 6.8 months (range, 6 to 22 months). All patients survived and reported few discomforts.

Conclusions

RDP is feasible and allows the preservation of the splenic vessels.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Liu et al.

【 图 表 】

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Kimura W, Inoue T, Futakawa N, Shinkai H, Han I, Muto T. Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with conservation of the splenic artery and vein. Surgery. 1996; 120:885-90.
• [2]Warshaw AL. Conservation of the spleen with distal pancreatectomy. Arch Surg. 1988; 123:550-3.
• [3]Palep JH. Robotic assisted minimally invasive surgery. J Minim Access Surg. 2009; 5:1-7.
• [4]Giulianotti PC, Sbrana F, Bianco FM, Elli EF, Shah G, Addeo P et al.. Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: single-surgeon experience. Surg Endosc. 2010; 24:1646-57.
• [5]Waters JA, Canal DF, Wiebke EA, Dumas RP, Beane JD, Aguilar-Saavedra JR et al.. Robotic distal pancreatectomy: cost effective? Surgery. 2010; 148:814-23.
• [6]Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD et al.. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009; 250:187-96.
• [7]Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G, Fingerhut A, Yeo C, Izbicki J et al.. Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery. 2005; 138:8-13.
• [8]Hwang HK, Chung YE, Kim KA, Kang CM, Lee WJ. Revisiting vascular patency after spleen-preserving laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with conservation of splenic vessels. Surg Endosc. 2012; 26:1765-71.
• [9]Shoup M, Brennan MF, McWhite K, Leung DH, Klimstra D, Conlon KC. The value of splenic preservation with distal pancreatectomy. Arch Surg. 2002; 137:164-8.
• [10]Ferrone CR, Konstantinidis IT, Sahani DV, Wargo JA, Fernandez-del Castillo C, Warshaw AL. Twenty-three years of the Warshaw operation for distal pancreatectomy with preservation of the spleen. Ann Surg. 2011; 253:1136-9.
• [11]Olah A. Surgery of the pancreas. Magy Seb. 2009; 62:258-64.
• [12]Giulianotti PC, Coratti A, Angelini M, Sbrana F, Cecconi S, Balestracci T et al.. Robotics in general surgery: personal experience in a large community hospital. Arch Surg. 2003; 138:777-84.
• [13]Kang CM, Chi HS, Hyeung WJ, Kim KS, Choi JS, Lee WJ et al.. The first korean experience of telemanipulative robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy using the da vinci system. Yonsei Med J. 2007; 48:540-5.
• [14]Kang CM, Kim DH, Lee WJ, Chi HS. Conventional laparoscopic and robot-assisted spleen-preserving pancreatectomy: does da Vinci have clinical advantages? Surg Endosc. 2011; 25:2004-9.
• [15]Kang CM, Kim DH, Lee WJ, Chi HS. Initial experiences using robot-assisted central pancreatectomy with pancreaticogastrostomy: a potential way to advanced laparoscopic pancreatectomy. Surg Endosc. 2011; 25:1101-6.
• [16]Abood GJ, Can MF, Daouadi M, Huss HT, Steve JY, Ramalingam L et al.. Robotic-assisted minimally invasive central pancreatectomy: technique and outcomes. J Gastrointest Surg. 2013; 17:1002-8.
• [17]Daouadi M, Zureikat AH, Zenati MS, Choudry H, Tsung A, Bartlett DL et al.. Robot-assisted minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is superior to the laparoscopic technique. Ann Surg. 2013; 257:128-32.
• [18]Ntourakis D, Marzano E, Lopez Penza PA, Bachellier P, Jaeck D, Pessaux P. Robotic distal splenopancreatectomy: bridging the gap between pancreatic and minimal access surgery. J Gastrointest Surg. 2010; 14:1326-30.
• [19]Takeuchi K, Tsuzuki Y, Ando T, Sekihara M, Hara T, Kori T et al.. Distal pancreatectomy: is staple closure beneficial? ANZ J Surg. 2003; 73:922-5.
• [20]Kim DH, Kang CM, Lee WJ, Chi HS. The first experience of robot assisted spleen-preserving laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in Korea. Yonsei Med J. 2011; 52:539-42.
• [21]Zhou ZQ, Kim SC, Song KB, Park KM, Lee JH, Lee YJ. Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: comparative study of spleen preservation with splenic vessel resection and splenic vessel preservation. World J Surg. 2014; 38(11):2973-9.
• [22]Lai EC, Tang CN. Current status of robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy: a comprehensive review. Asian J Endosc Surg. 2013; 6:158-64.