Laparoscopic pancreatectomy for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors: outcomes in a single high-volume institution

Objective To investigate the perioperative and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic pancreatectomy for benign and low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors, and further compare the outcomes between different surgical techniques. Methods We retrospectively collected clinical data of consecutive patients with benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors underwent surgery from February 2014 to February 2019. Patients were grouped and compared according to different surgical operations they accepted. Results Totally 164 patients were reviewed and 83 patients underwent laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPPPD), 41 patients underwent laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) and 20 patients underwent laparoscopic central pancreatectomy (LCP) were included in this study, the rest 20 patients underwent laparoscopic enucleation were excluded. There were 53 male patients and 91 female patients. The median age of these patients was 53.0 years (IQR 39.3–63.0 years). The median BMI was 21.5 kg/m2 (IQR 19.7–24.0 kg/m2). The postoperative severe complication was 4.2% and the 90-days mortality was 0. Compare with LCP group, the LPPPD and LSPDP group had longer operation time (300.4 ± 89.7 vs. 197.5 ± 30.5 min, P < 0.001) while LSPDP group had shorter operation time (174.8 ± 46.4 vs. 197.5 ± 30.5 min, P = 0.027), more blood loss [140.0 (50.0–1000.0) vs. 50.0 (20.0–200.0) ml P < 0.001 and 100.0 (20.0–300.0) vs. 50.0 (20.0–200.0 ml, P = 0.039, respectively), lower rate of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula [3 (3.6%) vs. 8 (40.0%), P < 0.001 and 3 (7.3%) vs. 8 (40.0%), P = 0.006, respectively], lower rate of postpancreatectomy hemorrhage [0 (0%) vs. 2 (10.0%), P = 0.036 and (0%) vs. 2 (10.0%) P = 0.104, respectively] and lower rate of postoperative severe complications [2 (2.4%) vs.4 (20.0%), P = 0.012 and 0 (0%) vs. 4 (20.0%), P = 0.009, respectively], higher proportion of postoperative pancreatin and insulin treatment (pancreatin: 39.8% vs., 15% P = 0.037 and 24.4%vs. 15%, P = 0.390; insulin: 0 vs. 18.1%, P = 0.040 and 0 vs. 12.2%, P = 0.041). Conclusions Overall, laparoscopic pancreatectomy could be safely performed for benign and low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors while the decision to perform laparoscopic central pancreatectomy should be made carefully for fit patients who can sustain a significant postoperative morbidity and could benefit from the excellent long-term results even in a high-volume center.

Intentional internal drainage tube method for nonlocalized persistent pancreatic leakage: a case report

Background Persistent pancreatic leakage (PL) due to disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS) is associated with severe morbidity and mortality and it usually treated with internal drainage. However, in cases without localized fistula formation, internal drainage is challenging to perform. We report an original one-stage surgical approach for nonlocalized persistent PL, namely, the “intentional internal drainage tube method”. Case presentation A 49-year-old woman whose main pancreatic duct was penetrated during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography experienced severe PL. Peritoneal lavage and a second operation involving central pancreatectomy failed to relieve the symptoms, and nonlocalized PL persisted due to DPDS. Although we attempted a radical resection of the pancreatic remnants as a third strategy, the highly inflamed tissue and massive bleeding prevented the completion of the procedure. We sutured the pancreatic head margin and performed a pancreaticojejunostomy to the distal margin. Because these two cut margins could possibly be the source of the persistent PL, we created a hole at the Roux-en-Y jejunal limb, and a silicone drainage tube was inserted into the peritoneal space via this hole. Postoperatively, we continuously suctioned the intentional internal drainage tube, and the residual PL cavity gradually diminished. Even after removal of the tube, the residual PL drained internally into the jejunum through this hole. Conclusions We present this intentional internal drainage tube method as a novel alternative approach for the management of nonlocalized PL consequential of DPDS. Due to the simplicity and minimally invasive nature of this method, we propose this technique may also be used to treat various types of nonlocalized persistent PL or be used prophylactically for central pancreatectomy.