Pancreatic enucleation is indicated for selected patients and tumours with very low oncological risk to preserve a maximum of healthy pancreatic parenchyma. Minimally invasive pancreatic enucleation (MIPE) is increasingly performed. This study aims to assess the impact of tumor location and center experience on textbook outcomes (TBO) in patients undergoing MIPE.

Retrospective nationwide multicentric cohort study including MIPE performed between 2010 and 2021. Tumor localization was classified as head/uncus, neck or body/tail (results are presented in this order). Centers were classified according to a mean volume of MI pancreatectomies performed per year: lower (< 5/year), intermediate (5 to 10/year) and higher volume (≥ 10/year). TBO was defined as meeting all 6 criteria: no postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), no post-pancreatectomy haemorrhage (PPH), no bile leak, no readmission, no mortality, and no severe morbidity.

27 participating centers performed 200 MIPE located in head/uncus (n = 65, 33%), neck (n = 26, 13%) and body/tail (n = 109, 55%), 8% of them performed by robotic approach. Mortality reached 1.5% (n = 3). Head/uncus lesions were larger (p = 0.03), frequently BD-IPMN (p = 0.04), with significant longer operative time (p = 0.002). TBO achievement was high across all tumor locations (52 vs. 73 vs. 67%, p = 0.09) with higher PPH (p = 0.03) or bile leaks (p = 0.03) for head/uncus lesions. In multivariate analysis, overweight (OR 0.49), preoperative biopsy (OR 0.41) and head/uncus lesion (OR 0.34) were independently associated with lower TBO. No independent risk factor was found for POPF or severe morbidity. While expertise level influenced indications, with more cystic lesions (p = 0.002), larger tumors (p = 0.003), 3D use (p = 0.001), and head/uncus lesions (p = 0.04) in high volume centers, TBO was not significantly different (p = 0.45).

MIPE is feasible with 1.5% mortality whatever its localization with higher morbidity for head/uncus lesions, justified by the will to avoid pancreaticoduodenectomy. High volume centers push the limits of MIPE without increasing morbidity.

Surgical treatment for a benign or low-grade malignant tumor in the pancreatic head remains a challenge at present. As an organ-sparing procedure, enucleation is ideal. However, it is still controversial whether laparoscopic enucleation (LapEN) can be safely performed for a pancreatic head tumor, especially a deeply embedded one.

The cases who underwent LapEN of a pancreatic tumor from January 2014 to September 2022 in our hospital were collected and analyzed.

A total of 151 cases were collected. The incidence of pancreatic fistula (PF, grade B) was 21.9 %. No patient developed PF (grade C) or died. Compared with enucleating a tumor in the distal pancreas (N = 98), enucleating a tumor in the pancreatic head (N = 53) showed a longer operation time and a higher incidence of conversion. The cases with a tumor in the pancreatic head were then divided into the group with a deeply embedded tumor (N = 32) and the group with a superficial tumor (N = 21). The embedded group had a smaller tumor size and a higher proportion of insulinoma. There were no statistical differences in the parameters of operation time, blood loss and incidence of complications between the two groups. The outcomes of enucleating a tumor deeply embedded in the proximal and distal pancreas were further analyzed, which indicated no statistical differences in clinical parameters between the two groups.

LapEN of a tumor in the pancreatic head is feasible and safe, even for a deeply embedded tumor.

Minimally invasive surgery is the optimal treatment for insulinoma. The present study aimed to compare short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic surgery for sporadic benign insulinoma.

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic surgery for insulinoma at our center between September 2007 and December 2019 was conducted. The demographic, perioperative and postoperative follow-up results were compared between the laparoscopic and robotic groups.

A total of 85 patients were enrolled, including 36 with laparoscopic approach and 49 with robotic approach. Enucleation was the preferred surgical procedure. Fifty-nine patients (69.4%) underwent enucleation; among them, 26 and 33 patients underwent laparoscopic and robotic surgery, respectively. Robotic enucleation had a lower conversion rate to laparotomy (0 vs. 19.2%, P = 0.013), shorter operative time (102.0 vs. 145.5 min, P = 0.008) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (6.0 vs. 8.5 d, P = 0.002) than laparoscopic enucleation. There were no differences between the groups in terms of intraoperative blood loss, the rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula and complications. After a median follow-up of 65 months, two patients in the laparoscopic group developed a functional recurrence and none of the patients in the robotic group had a recurrence.

Robotic enucleation can reduce the conversion rate to laparotomy and shorten operative time, which might lead to a reduction in postoperative hospital stay.

The efficacy and safety of minimally invasive pancreatic enucleation (PE) have rarely been investigated. This study aimed to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive enucleation (MIEn) with those of open enucleation (OEn) for benign/low-grade malignant pancreatic neoplasms.

Data collected from patients who underwent PE between January 2011 and June 2020 at our centre were analysed.

Forty-two patients who underwent MIEn (10 - robot-assisted and 32 - laparoscopic) and 47 who underwent OEn were included in this study. Compared with the OEn group, the MIEn group showed shorter operation time (147.6 ± 71.3 min vs. 183.1 ± 64.3 min), shorter post-operative hospital stay (11.5 ± 3.9 days vs. 13.4 ± 4.2 days), shorter off-bed activity time (2.9 ± 0.9 days vs. 3.7 ± 1.0 days) and lower estimated blood loss (EBL) (118.5 ± 59.2 mL vs. 153.1 ± 85.0 mL). Overall complication rate (47.6% vs. 55.3%), overall post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rate (40.5% vs. 44.7%) and Grade B + C POPF rate (11.9% vs. 19.1%) were similar in both the groups. For neoplasms located in the proximal pancreas, MIEn showed more favourable perioperative outcomes than OEn. Unlike MIEn for superficial neoplasms, MIEn for neoplasms deeply embedded in the pancreas resulted in a longer operative time and tended to increase EBL and the incidence of complications and POPF. During the follow-up period, no significant differences were observed between these two groups in terms of pancreatic function or quality of life.

Compared to OEn, MIEn is effective and safe for patients with benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic neoplasms. However, MIEn for embedded pancreatic neoplasms is recommended only in experienced centres because of the high rates of complications and POPF.

Risk factors for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) following pancreatic enucleation by the open approach (OpenEN) are well known. However, ENs are more frequently performed laparoscopically (LapEN). The aim of this study was to analyze the risk factors of POPF following LapEN.

All patients in our prospective database who underwent LapEN were evaluated. We report the demographics, surgical, early and long-term outcomes. Numerous variables were analyzed to identify the risk factors of POPF.

From 2008 to 2020, 650 laparoscopic pancreatic resections were performed including 64 EN (10%). The median age was 51 years old (17-79), median BMI was 24 (19-48), and 44 patients were women (69%). The main presentation was an incidental diagnosis (n = 40; 62%), pain (n= 10;16%), and hypoglycemia (n = 8;12%). The main indications were neuroendocrine tumors (40; 63%), mucinous cystadenomas (15; 23%), intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasie (3; 5%), and other benign cysts (6; 9%). Lesions were located on the distal pancreas (43; 67%), head (n = 17; 27%), and neck (4; 6%). The median size was 20 mm (9-110); 30 mm (20-110) for mucinous cystadenoma and 18 mm (8-33) for NET. The median operative time was 90 mn (30-330), median blood loss was 20 ml (0-800) ml, and there were no transfusions and one conversion. There were no mortalities and overall morbidity (n = 22; 34%) included grades B and C POPF (10;16%) and post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (4; 6%). The median hospital stay was 7 days (3-42). There were no invaded lymph nodes and all cystic lesions were nonmalignant. After a mean follow-up of 24 months, there was no recurrence. The risk factors for grades B/C POPF were mucinous cystadenoma and proximity to the Wirsung duct < 3 mm.

In this series, the outcome of LapEN was excellent with no mortality and a low rate of morbidity. However, the risk of POPF is increased with cystic lesions and those close to the Wirsung duct.

Background: Laparoscopic technique has been increasingly applied in the treatment of selected pancreatic tumors. The aim of this study is to evaluate the experience with laparoscopic enucleation of pancreatic neoplasms (LEPNs), for selected pancreatic diseases, at a high-volume referral center. Methods: Between May 2012 and October 2020, LEPNs was attempted in 16 patients with selected pancreatic neoplasms. The localization of tumors, etiology, indications, and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Results: Sixteen patients were included. LEPN was successfully performed in 13 patients, 3 conversions to open procedure were required. The definitive histopathological result of the resected pieces showed prevalence of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms. Postoperative major complications occurred for 3 patients (18.7%), the 3 of them presented postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The median hospital stay was 4.5 days (range 2-7) for patients without POPF and 14.6 days (3-30) for those who presented with POPF. No deaths were registered. During a median follow-up of 43.8 months (0.2-109), no new-onset exocrine or endocrine insufficiency was diagnosed, no patient experienced tumor recurrence and, the 4 patients who underwent LEPN for insulinoma, remained asymptomatic. Conclusion: LEPNs has become a valuable alternative for patients with benign or low risk of malignancy tumors. Appropriate preoperative imaging is key for localization. Whenever feasible, this technique not only reduces the risks of exocrine and endocrine insufficiency, but also adds the well-known advantages of minimally invasive techniques, making it a safe and feasible treatment.

The feasibility and safety of minimally invasive enucleation (ME) for benign or borderline pancreatic tumors is still unclear. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes between ME and open enucleation (OE).

All patients undergoing pancreatic enucleation between October 2001 and January 2020 were analyzed from a prospective database. Consecutive patients undergoing ME were compared with patients undergoing OE in a matched-pair analysis (1:2).

Of 358 patients, undergoing enucleation, 120 matched patients (ME n = 40, OE n = 80) were included. Patients undergoing ME had less blood loss (median 50 vs. 100 ml, P = 0.025) and had a higher proportion of patients discharged by 7 days, than patients undergoing OE (38% vs. 18%, P = 0.016). The rates of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and major complications (Clavien grade ≥ 3) were similar between both groups. Risk factor analysis for POPF B/C showed no significant parameters associated with POPF, including tumor size and proximity to the main pancreatic duct.

Compared with conventional OE, ME reduces the amount of bleeding and allows earlier postoperative discharge, without increasing the incidence of major complications. Thus, minimally invasive enucleation should be considered for benign tumors of the pancreas when technically and oncologically feasible.

Laparoscopic enucleation of pancreatic tumours is seemingly a simple procedure, but challenging as the tumour is deeply embedded in the pancreatic parenchyma. Our study reports a single-centre experience for these cases.

Cases with a tumour underwent laparoscopic enucleation from January 2014 to March 2020 in our hospital were collected and analysed.

Sixty-six cases were enrolled, including 21 men and 45 women with an average age of 43.6 ± 16.7 years old. The mean size of tumours was 2.7 ± 1.8 cm. The tumours were mainly located at the pancreatic head and neck (63.6%). The most common pathological diagnoses were insulinomas, followed by solid pseudopapillary tumours. Incidences of overall complications and pancreatic fistula (PF, Grade B) were 24.2% and 19.7%, respectively. No patient developed PF (Grade C) or died. Cases were divided into two groups according to whether the tumour was deeply embedded in the pancreas. Compared to the group with a superficial tumour (n = 36), the group with an embedded tumour (n = 30) had a longer operation time and drainage duration and a smaller tumour size (P < 0.05), but did not increase the incidence of complications and PF (Grade B/C).

Laparoscopic enucleation of tumours that were deeply embedded in the pancreas was technically feasible and safe.

This study aims to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of minimally-invasive enucleation (MIEn) of the pancreas versus open enucleation (OEn).

This is a retrospective review of 20 consecutive patients who underwent pancreatic enucleation at a single institution.

Seven patients underwent MIEn, of which 3 were robotic and 4 were laparoscopic. After propensity-adjusted analysis, the only significant difference was a reduced rate of readmissions within 30 days in the MIEn group versus the OEn group [0 vs 4 (30.8%), p=0.0464]. There were no conversions to open in the MIEn group, and median operation time was similar in both groups. There was no difference in median EBL in both groups, and none of the patients in our series required blood transfusions. The overall morbidity rate was 45.0% and the major complication (Clavien-Dindo>2) rate was 15%; which was similar between both groups. Seven (35%) patients had a Grade B/C POPF, and there was no significant difference between the two groups for this. The MIEn group had a shorter median length of stay compared to OEn [5 days (range, 3-24) vs 8.5 days (range, 5-42)] this was not significant on propensity-adjusted analysis (p=0.3195). There was no post-operative 90-day/in-hospital mortality in all 20 patients.

Our experience demonstrates that MIEn was associated with similar perioperative outcomes and fewer readmissions compared to OEn.

Pancreatic enucleation (pEN) as parenchyma-sparing procedure for small pancreatic neoplasms is quickly becoming the most common surgical option in such setting. Nowadays, pEN is frequently carried out through a minimally invasive approach either laparoscopic or robotic. Its impact on overall perioperative complications and pancreatic fistula (POPF) is still under evaluation. The scope of our systematic review is to assess pEN's perioperative outcomes and to evaluate the effect of the minimally invasive techniques over POPF and other surgical complications.

We performed a systematic literature search (time-frame January 1999-September 2018), considering exclusively those studies which included at least 5 cases of either open or minimally invasive pEN. Data regarding postoperative outcome and POPF were extracted and analyzed. We defined postoperative morbidities by the Clavien-Dindo classification while POPF according to the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF) definition.

Sixty-three studies met the criteria selected, accounting for a study population of 2485 patients. 27.7% had a minimally invasive pEN. The overall postoperative morbidity rate was 46.1% with 11.9% rated as severe (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3). Mortality rate was 0.69%. The minimally invasive approach to pEN led to a statistically significant reduction of both the overall POPF rate (28.7% vs. 45.9%, p < 0.001), and clinically significant B-C POPF (p < 0.027). The postoperative overall morbidity rate was clearly in favor of the minimally invasive approach (27.6% vs. 55.2%, p < 0.001).

Our review confirms that pEN is a safe and feasible technique for the treatment of small benign or low-grade pancreatic neoplasms and it can be implemented with an acceptable morbidity rate along with low mortality. The minimally invasive approach is gaining widespread acceptance due to its supposed non-inferiority compared with the traditional open approach. In our review, it showed to be even better in terms of POPF incidence rate and short-term postoperative outcome. Still, such data need to be corroborated by randomized clinical trials.

Robotic surgery is the most advanced minimally invasive technique for the treatment of complicated solid pseudopapillary tumors (SPT). The aim of this study is to evaluate feasibility of robotic surgery for the treatment of SPTs in the pancreatic head.

A retrospective analysis of the clinical data of 83 SPTs in pancreatic head was conducted. Clinical characteristics were extracted and propensity score matching (PSM) was used to compare and evaluate mid-term outcomes of the two techniques.

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), duodenum-preserving partial pancreatic head resection (DPPHR-P) and tumor enucleation (En) were performed in 51, 24, and 8 patients, respectively. The robotic approach was associated with a significantly lower volume of blood loss, lower need for transfusion, and faster time to post-surgery recovery. Major complications and costs were comparable for both techniques.

A robotic approach provides an alternative to open surgery for SPTs in the pancreatic head without increasing the incidence of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (CRPF) or other major complications and with good patient outcomes.

Parenchymal sparing procedures are gaining interest in pancreatic surgery and recent studies have reported that minimally invasive pancreatic enucleation may be associated with enhanced outcomes when compared with traditional surgery. By meta-analyzing the available data from the literature, minimally invasive surgery is not at higher risk of pancreatic fistula and offers a number of advantages over conventional surgery for pancreatic enucleation.

Neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas (pNETs) are a rare group of neoplasms that originate from the endocrine portion of the pancreas. Tumors that either secrete or do not secrete compounds, resulting in symptoms, can be classified as functioning and non-functioning pNETs, respectively. The prevalence of such tumors has recently increased due to the use of more sensitive imaging techniques, such as multidetector computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and endoscopic ultrasound. The biological behavior of pNETs varies widely from indolent, well-differentiated tumors to those that are far more aggressive. The most effective and radical treatment for pNETs is surgical resection. Over the last decade, minimally invasive surgery has been increasingly used in pancreatectomy, with laparoscopic pancreatic surgery (LPS) emerging as an alternative to open pancreatic surgery (OPS) in patients with pNETs. Non-comparative studies have shown that LPS is safe and effective. In well-selected groups of patients with pancreatic lesions, LPS was found to results in good perioperative outcomes, including reduced intraoperative blood loss, postoperative pain, time to recovery, and length of hospital stay. Despite the encouraging results of studies from highly specialized centers with extensive experience, no randomized trials to date have conclusively validated these findings. Indications for minimally invasive LPS for patients with pNETs remain unclear. This review presents the current state of LPS for pNETs.

Over the past decade, there has been increasing adoption of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery world-wide and this has naturally expanded to the management of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PNENs). More recently, robotic pancreatic surgery (RPS) was introduced to overcome the limitations during laparoscopic pancreatic surgery (LPS). Due to the relative rarity of PNEN and the novelty of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery in particular RPS today, the evidence for robotic surgery in PNENs remains extremely limited. Presently, the available evidence is limited to a few low level retrospective case-control studies. These studies suggest that RPS may be associated with a higher splenic preservation rates and lower open conversion rates compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery. Ideally a prospective randomized trial should be performed but this would be extremely challenging due to the rarity of PNEN, making it almost impossible to conduct a sufficiently powered trial.

Neuroendocrine tumors (NET) represent the variability of almost benign lesions either secreting hormones occurring as a single lesion up to malignant lesions with metastatic potential. Treatment of NET is usually performed by surgical resection. Due to the rarity of NET, surgical treatment is mainly based on the experience and recommendations of experts and less on the basis of prospective randomized studies. In addition, the development and establishment of new surgical procedures is made more difficult by their rarity. The development of laparoscopic-assisted surgery has significantly improved the treatment of many diseases. Due to the well-known advantages of laparoscopic surgery, this method has also been increasingly used to treat NET. However, due to limited comparative data, the assumed superiority of laparoscopic surgery in the area NET remains often unclear or not yet proven. This review focuses on the present usage of laparoscopic techniques in the area of NET. Relating to the current literature, this review presents the evidence of various laparoscopic procedures for treatment of adrenal, pancreatic and intestine NET as well as extraadrenal pheochromocytoma and neuroendocrine liver metastases. Further, this review focuses on recent new developments of minimally invasive surgery in the area of NET. Here, robotic-assisted surgery and single-port surgery are promising approaches.

Enucleation is increasingly performed for benign or borderline tumours of the pancreas because it is a parenchyma-sparing and less invasive procedure compared to conventional pancreatectomy, which reduces the risk of exocrine and endocrine insufficiency. This study retrospectively evaluated and compared the pre-, intra-, and post-operative clinical characteristics after open and robotic approaches for pancreatic enucleation.

Fifty-six cases of enucleation for benign or borderline tumours of the pancreas treated from March 2010 to July 2015 were identified by a retrospective search. These included 25 patients who underwent an open approach and 31 patients who underwent a robotic approach. The clinical characteristics were extracted and compared.

The two groups had a similar location and pathology of the tumour. The robotic group had a significantly shorter operation time and significantly less blood loss than the open group. The rates of clinical pancreatic fistula (PF) formation and major complications were similar. The robotic approach could be applied for a tumour on the right side of the pancreas without increasing the incidence of clinical PF or other major complications. The patients with clinical PF had a significantly shorter distance between the lesion and the main pancreatic duct (MPD).

Robotic enucleation appears to be a feasible and safe approach for benign or borderline tumours of the pancreas and was associated with similarly favourable surgical outcomes as the open approach. Identifying and avoiding the MPD is an important step during enucleation.

Introduced more than 20 years ago, laparoscopic pancreatic surgery (LAPS) has not reached a uniform acceptance among HPB surgeons. As a result, there is no consensus regarding its use in patients with pancreatic neoplasms. This study, organized by the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES), aimed to develop consensus statements and clinical recommendations on the application of LAPS in these patients.

An international panel of experts was selected based on their clinical and scientific expertise in laparoscopic and open pancreatic surgery. Each panelist performed a critical appraisal of the literature and prepared evidence-based statements assessed by other panelists during Delphi process. The statements were further discussed during a one-day face-to-face meeting followed by the second round of Delphi. Modified statements were presented at the plenary session of the 24th International Congress of the EAES in Amsterdam and in a web-based survey.

LAPS included laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD), enucleation, central pancreatectomy, and ultrasound. In general, LAPS was found to be safe, especially in experienced hands, and also advantageous over an open approach in terms of intraoperative blood loss, postoperative recovery, and quality of life. Eighty-five percent or higher proportion of responders agreed with the majority (69.5%) of statements. However, the evidence is predominantly based on retrospective case-control studies and systematic reviews of these studies, clearly affected by selection bias. Furthermore, no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been published to date, although four RCTs are currently underway in Europe.

LAPS is currently in its development and exploration stages, as defined by the international IDEAL framework for surgical innovation. LDP is feasible and safe, performed in many centers, while LPD is limited to few centers. RCTs and registry studies are essential to proceed with the assessment of LAPS.

Previous studies report successful application of laparoscopic pancreatic enucleation (LPE). However, the evidence is limited to small series. This study aimed to evaluate the indications, technique and outcome of LPE at a tertiary care institution.

Between February 1998 and April 2016, 45 consecutive LPEs were performed at Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet. Twenty-four (53.3 %) patients subjected to right-sided LPE (RLPE) were compared with 21 (46.7 %) patients who had undergone left-sided LPE (LLPE). A case-matched analysis (1:2) was performed to compare the outcomes following LLPE and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP).

Patient demographics, BMI, ASA score and pathological characteristics were similar between the RLPE and LLPE groups. Operative time was slightly longer for RLPE [123 (53-320) vs 102 (50-373) min, P = 0.09]. The rates of severe morbidity (≥Accordion grade III) and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (grades B/C) were comparable, although with a trend for higher rate of complications following LLPE (16.7 vs 33.3 %; P = 0.19 and 20.8 vs 33.3 %, P = 0.34, respectively). The hospital stay was similar between RLPE and LLPE [5 (2-80) vs 7 (2-52), P = 0.49]. A case-matched analysis demonstrated shorter operating time [145 (90-350) vs 103 (50-233) min, P = 0.02], but higher readmission rate following LLPE (25 vs 3.1 %, P = 0.037).

LLPE seems to be associated with a higher risk of postoperative morbidity and readmission rates than LDP. RLPE is a feasible, safe approach and a reasonable alternative to pancreatoduodenectomy in selected patients with pancreatic lesions.

The studies comparing laparoscopic enucleation (LE) with open enucleation (OE) are limited. This study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing LE and OE and to assess the pancreatic function after LE.

Between February 2001 and July 2014, patients who underwent enucleation were reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups as LE and OE. Data considered for comparison analysis were patient demographics, intraoperative variables, morbidity, postoperative hospital stay, mortality, pathologic findings, and long-term follow-up (including pancreatic function).

Thirty-seven patients (15 LE and 22 OE) were included in the final analysis. Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups. LE group showed significantly shorter operating time (118.2 ± 33.1 vs. 155.2 ± 44.3 min, p = 0.009), lower estimated blood loss (80.0 ± 71.2 vs. 195.5 ± 103.4 ml, p = 0.001), shorter first flatus time (1.8 ± 1.0 vs. 3.4 ± 1.8 days, p = 0.004), shorter diet start time (2.4 ± 1.0 vs. 4.4 ± 2.0 days, p = 0.001), shorter postoperative hospital stay (7.9 ± 3.4 vs. 11.2 ± 5.7 days, p = 0.046). Postoperative outcomes, including morbidity (40.0 vs. 45.5 %, p = 1.000), grade B/C pancreatic fistula rates (20.0 vs. 13.6 %, p = 0.874), and mortality, were similar in the two groups. The median follow-up period was 47 months (range 7-163 months). No local recurrence or distant metastasis was detected in either group. Only one patient (4.8 %) underwent OE developed new-onset diabetes, in comparison with none in the LE group. One patient (7.1 %) had weight loss and received pancreatic enzyme supplementation in the LE group, in comparison with two patients (9.5 %) in the OE group.

LE is a safe and feasible technique for the benign or low malignant-potential pancreatic neoplasms. Compared to OE, LE had shorter operating time, lower estimated blood loss, and faster recovery. LE could preserve the pancreatic function as the OE.