Full Text:   <846>

Summary:  <239>

CLC number: R735.9

On-line Access: 2017-06-05

Received: 2016-12-03

Revision Accepted: 2017-03-04

Crosschecked: 2017-05-08

Cited: 0

Clicked: 1783

Citations:  Bibtex RefMan EndNote GB/T7714

 ORCID:

Ai-bin Zhang

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1149-4347

-   Go to

Article info.
Open peer comments

Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE B 2017 Vol.18 No.6 P.532-538

http://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.B1600541


Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a single-center experience


Author(s):  Ai-bin Zhang, Ye Wang, Chen Hu, Yan Shen, Shu-sen Zheng

Affiliation(s):  Department of Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310003, China

Corresponding email(s):   shusenzheng@zju.edu.cn

Key Words:  Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, Open distal pancreatectomy, Pancreatic neoplasm, Pancreatic fistula


Ai-bin Zhang, Ye Wang, Chen Hu, Yan Shen, Shu-sen Zheng. Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a single-center experience[J]. Journal of Zhejiang University Science B, 2017, 18(6): 532-538.

@article{title="Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a single-center experience",
author="Ai-bin Zhang, Ye Wang, Chen Hu, Yan Shen, Shu-sen Zheng",
journal="Journal of Zhejiang University Science B",
volume="18",
number="6",
pages="532-538",
year="2017",
publisher="Zhejiang University Press & Springer",
doi="10.1631/jzus.B1600541"
}

%0 Journal Article
%T Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a single-center experience
%A Ai-bin Zhang
%A Ye Wang
%A Chen Hu
%A Yan Shen
%A Shu-sen Zheng
%J Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE B
%V 18
%N 6
%P 532-538
%@ 1673-1581
%D 2017
%I Zhejiang University Press & Springer
%DOI 10.1631/jzus.B1600541

TY - JOUR
T1 - Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a single-center experience
A1 - Ai-bin Zhang
A1 - Ye Wang
A1 - Chen Hu
A1 - Yan Shen
A1 - Shu-sen Zheng
J0 - Journal of Zhejiang University Science B
VL - 18
IS - 6
SP - 532
EP - 538
%@ 1673-1581
Y1 - 2017
PB - Zhejiang University Press & Springer
ER -
DOI - 10.1631/jzus.B1600541


Abstract: 
Objective: The aim of this study was to compare complications and oncologic outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) at a single center. Methods: Distal pancreatectomies performed for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma during a 4-year period were included in this study. A retrospective analysis of a database of this cohort was conducted. Results: Twenty-two patients underwent LDP for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, in comparison to seventy-six patients with comparable tumor characteristics treated by ODP. No patients with locally advanced lesions were included in this study. Comparing LDP group to ODP group, there were no significant differences in operation time (P=0.06) or blood loss (P=0.24). Complications (pancreatic fistula, P=0.62; intra-abdominal abscess, P=0.44; postpancreatectomy hemorrhage, P=0.34) were similar. There were no significant differences in the number of lymph nodes harvested (11.2±4.6 in LDP group vs. 14.4±5.5 in ODP group, P=0.44) nor the rate of patients with positive lymph nodes (36% in LDP group vs. 41% in ODP group, P=0.71). Incidence of positive margins was similar (9% in LDP group vs. 13% in ODP group, P=0.61). The mean overall survival time was (29.6±3.7) months for the LDP group and (27.6±2.1) months for ODP group. There was no difference in overall survival between the two groups (P=0.34). Conclusions: LDP is a safe and effective treatment for selected patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. A slow-compression of pancreas tissue with the GIA stapler is effective in preventing postoperative pancreatic fistula. The oncologic outcome is comparable with the conventional open approach. Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy contributed to oncological clearance.

腹腔镜与开腹胰体尾切除术对胰腺导管腺癌的治疗经验

目的:评估腹腔镜(LDP)与开腹胰体尾切除术(ODP)的并发症发生率和肿瘤清除效果。
创新点:本组病例的腹腔镜手术组采用endo-GIA缓慢压榨方法处理胰腺残端,并采用根治性顺行模块化胰脾切除术,获得了较低的术后胰漏发生率和良好的手术清除效果。
方法:收集4年间实施胰体尾切除手术的胰腺导管腺癌病例资料,进行回顾性分析。
结论:22例胰腺导管腺癌进行了LDP手术,76例病人进行了ODP手术。比较LDP和ODP组,两组在胰漏(P=0.62)、腹腔内脓肿(P=0.44)和术后出血(P=0.34)发生率无显著性差异。LDP组和ODP组术中获取的淋巴结数量(11.2±4.6 vs. 14.4±5.5,P=0.44)和淋巴结阳性病例数(36% vs. 41%,P=0.71)无显著性差异。切缘阳性发生率(9% vs. 13%, P=0.61)也无显著性差异。LDP组平均生存期(29.6±3.7)月,ODP组为(27.6±2.1)月,无显著性差异(P=0.35)。综上所述,腹腔镜胰体尾切除术对早期的胰腺导管癌是安全有效的。采用endo-GIA缓慢压榨方法可以预防术后胰漏发生,腹腔镜下根治性顺行模块化胰腺切除有利于肿瘤清除。腹腔镜手术可以达到和传统开腹手术相似的肿瘤清除效果。

关键词:腹腔镜胰体尾切除术;开腹胰体尾切除术;胰腺肿瘤;胰漏

Darkslateblue:Affiliate; Royal Blue:Author; Turquoise:Article

Reference

[1]Adsay, N.V., Basturk, O., Altinel, D., et al., 2009. The number of lymph nodes identified in a simple pancreatoduodenectomy specimen: comparison of conventional vs orange-peeling approach in pathologic assessment. Mod. Pathol., 22(1): 107-112.

[2]Baker, M.S., Bentrem, D.J., Ujiki, M.B., et al., 2009. A prospective single institution comparison of peri-operative outcomes for laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy. Surgery, 146(4):635-645.

[3]Bassi, C., Dervenis, C., Butturini, G., et al., 2005. Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery, 138(1):8-13.

[4]Briggs, C.D., Mann, C.D., Irving, G.R., et al., 2009. Systematic review of minimally invasive pancreatic resection. J. Gastrointest. Surg., 13(6):1129-1137.

[5]de Rooij, T., Tol, J.A., van Eijck, C.H., et al., 2016. Outcomes of distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the netherlands: a nationwide retrospective analysis. Ann. Surg. Oncol., 23(2):585-591.

[6]Fernández-Cruz, L., Cosa, R., Blanco, L., et al., 2007. Curative laparoscopic resection for pancreatic neoplasms: a critical analysis from a single institution. J. Gastrointest. Surg., 11(12):1607-1622.

[7]Jusoh, A.C., Ammori, B.J., 2012. Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review of comparative studies. Surg. Endosc., 26(4):904-913.

[8]Khorana, A.A., Mangu, P.B., Berlin, J., et al., 2016. Potentially curable pancreatic cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J. Clin. Oncol., 34(21):2541-2556.

[9]Kooby, D.A., Gillespie, T., Bentrem, D., et al., 2008. Left-sided pancreatectomy: a multicenter comparison of laparoscopic and open approaches. Ann. Surg., 248(3):438-446.

[10]Kooby, D.A., Hawkins, W.G., Schmidt, C.M., et al., 2010. A multicenter analysis of distal pancreatectomy for adenocarcinoma: is laparoscopic resection appropriate? J. Am. Coll. Surg., 210(5):779-785.

[11]Nakamura, M., Ueda, J., Kohno, H., et al., 2011. Prolonged peri-firing compression with a linear stapler prevents pancreatic fistula in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. Surg. Endosc., 25(3):867-871.

[12]Nigri, G.R., Rosman, A.S., Petrucciani, N., et al., 2011. Metaanalysis of trials comparing minimally invasive and open distal pancreatectomies. Surg. Endosc., 25(5):1642-1651.

[13]Patterson, E.J., Gagner, M., Salky, B., et al., 2001. Laparoscopic pancreatic resection: single-institution experience of 19 patients. J. Am. Coll. Surg., 193(3):281-287.

[14]Pericleous, S., Middleton, N., McKay, S.C., et al., 2012. Systematic review and meta-analysis of case-matched studies comparing open and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: is it a safe procedure? Pancreas, 41(7): 993-1000.

[15]Riviere, D., Gurusamy, K.S., Kooby, D.A., et al., 2016. Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev., 4: CD011391.

[16]Sahakyan, M.A., Kazaryan, A.M., Rawashdeh, M., et al., 2016. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: results of a multicenter cohort study on 196 patients. Surg. Endosc., 30(8):3409-3418.

[17]Shoup, M., Conlon, K.C., Klimstra, D., et al., 2003. Is extended resection for adenocarcinoma of the body or tail of the pancreas justified? J. Gastrointest. Surg., 7(8):946-952.

[18]Slidell, M.B., Chang, D.C., Cameron, J.L., et al., 2008. Impact of total lymph node count and lymph node ratio on staging and survival after pancreatectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a large, population-based analysis. Ann. Surg. Oncol., 15(1):165-174.

[19]Soh, Y.F., Kow, A.W., Wong, K.Y., et al., 2012. Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy: our institution’s 5-year experience. Asian J. Surg., 35(1): 29-36.

[20]Stauffer, J.A., Coppola, A., Mody, K., et al., 2016. Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. World J. Surg., 40(6):1477-1484.

[21]Strasberg, S.M., Linehan, D.C., Hawkins, W.G., 2007. Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy procedure for adenocarcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas: ability to obtain negative tangential margins. J. Am. Coll. Surg., 204(2):244-249.

[22]Sugiyama, M., Abe, N., Izumisato, Y., et al., 2001. Pancreatic transection using ultrasonic dissector in pancreato-duodenectomy. Am. J. Surg., 182(3):257-259.

[23]Teh, S.H., Tseng, D., Sheppard, B.C., 2007. Laparoscopic and open distal pancreatic resection for benign pancreatic disease. J. Gastrointest. Surg., 11(9):1120-1125.

[24]Velanovich, V., 2006. Case-control comparison of laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy. J. Gastrointest. Surg., 10(1):95-98.

[25]Wente, M.N., Veit, J.A., Bassi, C., et al., 2007. Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH)—An International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. Surgery, 142(1):20-25.

[26]Yan, J.F., Kuang, T.T., Ji, D.Y., et al., 2015. Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for benign or premalignant pancreatic neoplasms: a two-center comparative study. J. Zhejiang Univ.-Sci. B (Biomed. & Biotechnol.), 16(7):573-579.

Open peer comments: Debate/Discuss/Question/Opinion

<1>

Please provide your name, email address and a comment





Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE, 38 Zheda Road, Hangzhou 310027, China
Tel: +86-571-87952783; E-mail: cjzhang@zju.edu.cn
Copyright © 2000 - Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE