Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is a safe and effective procedure; however, its impact on perioperative inflammatory reactions compared with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) remains unclear. This study aimed to assess short-term outcomes following LDP and ODP regarding inflammatory reactions.

This retrospective study of 77 consecutive patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy for low-grade malignancies between 2005 and 2022 compared white blood cell (WBC) count, C-reactive protein (CRP) level, serum albumin level, and CRP/albumin ratio (CAR) between LDP and ODP. Complications, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), recovery program, and hospital stay period, were also compared.

POPF (17.1% vs. 38.7%, p = 0.039) and surgical morbidity (≥Clavien-Dindo grade III, 12.2% vs. 32.3%, p = 0.038) were significantly lower in LDP than in ODP, as for the difference in postoperative inflammatory response, including CRP and CAR, was just temporary. By multivariate analysis, CAR ≥6.94 on POD 3 was significant predictor of POPF (42.1% vs. 13.2%, odds ratio 4.828, p = 0.030).

LDP has lower POPF and earlier postoperative recovery. CAR could be a predictor of POPF.

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma of distal pancreas is hard to treat due to late presentation. While open distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy has had favourable outcomes, it has also had many complications which were low among Minimally invasive procedures. This retrospective cohort analysis compares minimally invasive and open distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) outcomes using a national inpatient database.

The study used 2016-2020 NIS data. The study included 1577 distal pancreatic malignant tumor surgery patients. There were 530 Minimally Invasive and 1047 Open groups. Propensity matched analysis was performed on surgical groups to reduce confounding variables.

In comparison to open procedures, minimally invasive techniques reduced hospital stays by 10 ​% (OR ​= ​0.90, 95 ​% CI 0.86-0.93). While not statistically significant, the unmatched analysis linked MIDP to lower in-hospital mortality. African Americans were 37 ​% less likely to undergo MIDP than Caucasians (OR ​= ​0.63, 95 ​% CI ​= ​0.40-0.96).

Nationwide analysis suggests MIDP may be a safe and effective surgical treatment for distal pancreatic adenocarcinoma. It may reduce hospital stays and mortality over open surgery. The study also suggests race may affect minimally invasive procedure rates.

The impact of cirrhosis on the postoperative outcomes of distal pancreatectomy is yet to be reported. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of distal pancreatectomy in patients with cirrhosis.

We conducted a retrospective, multicentric study patients with cirrhosis who underwent planned distal pancreatectomy between 2008 and 2020 in French high volume centers. Patients with cirrhosis were matched 1:4 for demographic, surgical, and histologic criteria with patients without cirrhosis. The primary endpoint was severe morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III). The secondary endpoints were postoperative complications, specifically related to cirrhosis and pancreatic surgery, and survival for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Overall, 32 patients with cirrhosis were matched with 128 patients without cirrhosis. Most patients (93.5%) had Child-Pugh A cirrhosis. The severe morbidity rate after distal pancreatectomy was higher in patients with cirrhosis than in those without cirrhosis (28.13% vs 25.75%, P = .11. The operative time was significantly longer in the cirrhotic group compared with controls (P = .01). However, patients with and without cirrhosis had comparable blood loss and conversion rates. Postoperatively, the two groups had similar rates of pancreatic fistula, hemorrhage, reoperation, postoperative mortality, and survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years.

The current study suggests that distal pancreatectomy in high-volume centers is feasible for patients with compensated cirrhosis.

As minimally invasive surgery gains grounds, surgeons are switching more towards laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) and robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) as opposed to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Through this study, we aimed at exploring the differences in perioperative and oncologic outcomes among the three surgical methods. We retrospectively collected data from 303 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy (DP) at a single high-volume institution between June 2015 and December 2021. We equally compared the perioperative and oncologic outcomes in patients who underwent ODP, LDP, and RDP by analyzing clinicopathologic and survival data. We consecutively included 303 cases in the study: open = 147 (48.5%), laparoscopic = 50 (16.5%), and robotic = 106 (35.0%). The median tumor size was significantly larger in the ODP group (P < 0.001) compared to the others. Cases in the RDP group experienced a longer duration of surgery (P < 0.001), smaller amount of blood loss (P < 0.001), smaller amount of blood transfusion (P = 0.042), and a shorter duration of hospital stay (p = 0.040) compared to cases in the ODP group. There was no significant difference observed when comparing other postoperative outcomes across the groups. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were similar across the significant differences among the three groups. The short-term postoperative and oncologic outcomes observed in the RDP and LDP groups were not inferior to those in the ODP group. The RDP has some perioperative advantages over the ODP. Therefore, RDP and LDP can safely and feasibly be performed in selected pancreatic tumors by experienced pancreatic surgeons.

Pancreatic surgery is challenging owing to the anatomical characteristics of the pancreas. Increasing attention has been paid to changes in quality of life (QOL) after pancreatic surgery.

To summarize and analyze current research results on QOL after pancreatic surgery.

A systematic search of the literature available on PubMed and EMBASE was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Relevant studies were identified by screening the references of retrieved articles. Studies on patients' QOL after pancreatic surgery published after January 1, 2012, were included. These included prospective and retrospective studies on patients' QOL after several types of pancreatic surgeries. The results of these primary studies were summarized inductively.

A total of 45 articles were included in the study, of which 13 were related to pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), seven to duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (DPPHR), nine to distal pancreatectomy (DP), two to central pancreatectomy (CP), and 14 to total pancreatectomy (TP). Some studies showed that 3-6 months were needed for QOL recovery after PD, whereas others showed that 6-12 months was more accurate. Although TP and PD had similar influences on QOL, patients needed longer to recover to preoperative or baseline levels after TP. The QOL was better after DPPHR than PD. However, the superiority of the QOL between patients who underwent CP and PD remains controversial. The decrease in exocrine and endocrine functions postoperatively was the main factor affecting the QOL. Minimally invasive surgery could improve patients' QOL in the early stages after PD and DP; however, the long-term effect remains unclear.

The procedure among PD, DP, CP, and TP with a superior postoperative QOL is controversial. The long-term benefits of minimally invasive versus open surgeries remain unclear. Further prospective trials are warranted.

Minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) has emerged as a parenchyma-preserving approach and has become the standard treatment for pancreatic benign and low-grade malignant lesions. Nevertheless, minimally invasive SPDP is still technically challenging, especially when vessel preservation is intended. This study aims to describe the technique and outcomes of laparoscopic (LSPDP) and robot-assisted spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (RSPDP) with intended vessel preservation, highlighting the important tips and tricks to overcome technical obstacles and optimize surgical outcomes.

A retrospective observational study of consecutive patients undergoing LSPDP and RSPDP with intended vessel preservation by a single surgeon in two different centers. A video demonstrating both surgical techniques is attached.

A total of 50 patients who underwent minimally invasive SPDP were included of which 88% underwent LSPDP and 12% RSPDP. Splenic vessels were preserved in 37 patients (74%) while a salvage vessel-resecting technique was performed in 13 patients (26%). The average surgery time was 178 ± 74 min for the vessel-preserving and 188 ± 57 for the vessel-resecting technique (p = 0.706) with an estimated blood loss of 100 mL in both groups (p = 0.663). The overall complication rate was 46% (n = 23) with major complications (Clavien Dindo ≥ III) observed in 14% (n = 7) of the patients. No conversions occurred. The median length of hospital stay was 4 days.

This study presented the results after minimally invasive SPDP with intended vessel preservation by a highly experienced pancreatic surgeon. It provided tips and tricks to successfully accomplish a minimally invasive SPDP, which can contribute to quick patient rehabilitation and optimal postoperative results.

Robotic distal pancreatectomy (DP) is an emerging attractive approach, but its role compared with laparoscopic or open surgery remains unclear. Benchmark values are novel and objective tools for such comparisons. The aim of this study was to identify benchmark cutoffs for many outcome parameters for DP with or without splenectomy beyond the learning curve.

This study analyzed outcomes from international expert centers from patients undergoing robotic DP for malignant or benign lesions. After excluding the first 10 cases in each center to reduce the effect of the learning curve, consecutive patients were included from the start of robotic DP up to June 2020. Benchmark patients had no significant comorbidities. Benchmark cutoff values were derived from the 75th or the 25th percentile of the median values of all benchmark centers. Benchmark values were compared with a laparoscopic control group from 4 high-volume centers and published open DP landmark series.

Sixteen centers contributed 755 cases, whereof 345 benchmark patients (46%) were included the analysis. Benchmark cutoffs included: operation time ≤300 minutes, conversion rate ≤3%, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula ≤32%, 3 months major complication rate ≤26.7%, and lymph node retrieval ≥9. The comprehensive complication index at 3 months was ≤8.7 without deterioration thereafter. Compared with robotic DP, laparoscopy had significantly higher conversion rates (5×) and overall complications, while open DP was associated with more blood loss and longer hospital stay.

This first benchmark study demonstrates that robotic DP provides superior postoperative outcomes compared with laparoscopic and open DP. Robotic DP may be expected to become the approach of choice in minimally invasive DP.

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 and Aims: Recent single-center retrospective studies have focused on laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) in elderly patients, and compared the outcomes between the laparoscopic and open approaches. Our study aimed to determine the outcomes of LPD in the elderly patients, by performing a systematic review and a meta-analysis of relevant studies. Methods: A comprehensive literature review was conducted utilizing the Embase, Medline, PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases to identify all studies that compared laparoscopic vs. open approach for pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Results: Five retrospective studies were included in the final analysis. Overall, 90-day mortality rates were significantly decreased after LPD in elderly patients compared with open approaches (RR = 0.56; 95%CI: 0.32−0.96; p = 0.037, I2 = 0%). The laparoscopic approach had similar mortality rate at 30-day, readmission rate in hospital, Clavien−Dindo complications, pancreatic fistula grade B/C, complete resection rate, reoperation for complications and blood loss as the open approach. Additionally, comparing with younger patients (<70 years old), no significant differences were seen in elderly cohort patients regarding mortality rate at 90 days, readmission rate to hospital, and complication rate. Conclusions: Based on our meta-analysis, we identify that LPD in elderly is a safe procedure, with significantly lower 90-day mortality rates when compared with the open approach. Our results should be considered with caution, considering the retrospective analyses of the included studies; larger prospective studies are required.

Early identification of complications after distal pancreatectomy splenectomy (DPS) poses challenges, as white blood cell count (WBC) is confounded by physiologic leukocytosis. We examined WBC patterns associated with complications after DPS.

Clinicopathologic data were collected for patients who underwent DPS in our system from 2009 to 2016. We examined WBC, temperature, platelet count (PC), and ratios of these variables as potential early indicators of patients at risk of infections or major complications (MCs).

348 patients met study inclusion, of whom 206 (59%) were women and the median patient age was 59 ± 15 years. Infectious and MC rates were 11% and 16%, respectively, with <1% 30-day mortality. Postoperative WBC peaks were higher in patients with infections and MCs compared with no complication (23 vs. 17, p < 0.0001). WBC peak timing occurred postoperative day (POD) 2-3 for uncomplicated cases while peaks occurred POD9 for patients with infections and MCs.

These data define patterns of leukocytosis following DPS. Although differences in infection markers were identified for patients with and without complications, no obvious thresholds were identified. Clinical suspicion for complications after DPS remains our best tool for early identification.

The perioperative management and technical details of laparoscopic clamp-crushing enucleation for low-malignant-potential pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PNENs) located close to the main pancreatic duct (MPD) in the body/tail of the pancreas using a perioperative MPD stent are reported. The procedure was performed in two patients with PNEN (13 and 10 mm in diameter) in the body/tail of the pancreas. A naso-pancreatic stent (NPS) was placed preoperatively in both patients. Resection was performed using Maryland-type bipolar forceps. The surgical duration was 139 and 55 min, and the estimated blood loss was 5 and 0 mL, respectively. One patient was discharged uneventfully on postoperative day (POD) 12. The other patient developed a grade B pancreatic fistula, but was discharged on POD 22. Laparoscopic clamp-crushing enucleation with an NPS might be a viable treatment option for tumors located close to the MPD.

In pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs), the impact of minimally invasive (MI) versus open resection on outcomes remains poorly studied. We queried a multi-institutional pancreatic cancer registry for patients with resected non-metastatic PNET from 1996−2020. Recurrence-free (RFS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and operative complications were evaluated. Two hundred and eighty-two patients were identified. Operations were open in 139 (49%) and MI in 143 (51%). Pancreaticoduodenectomy was performed in 77 (27%, n = 23 MI), distal pancreatectomy in 184 (65%, n = 109 MI), enucleation in 13 (5%), and total pancreatectomy in eight (3%). Median follow-up was 50 months. Thirty-six recurrences and 13 deaths from recurrent disease yielded 5-year RFS and DSS of 85% and 95%, respectively. On multivariable analysis, grade 1 (HR 0.07, p < 0.001) and grade 2 (HR 0.20, p = 0.002) tumors were associated with improved RFS, while T3/T4 tumors were associated with worse RFS (OR 2.78, p = 0.04). MI resection was not associated with RFS (HR 0.53, p = 0.14). There was insufficient mortality to evaluate DSS with multivariable analysis. Of 159 patients with available NSQIP data, incisional surgical site infections (SSIs), organ space SSIs, Grade B/C pancreatic fistulas, reoperations, and need for percutaneous drainage did not differ by operative approach (all p > 0.2). Nodal harvest was similar for MI versus open distal pancreatectomies (p = 0.16) and pancreaticoduodenectomies (p = 0.28). Minimally invasive surgical management of PNETs is equivalent for oncologic and postoperative outcomes.

Comparative data on percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) vs EUS-guided drainage (EUS-D) for management of symptomatic walled-off-necrosis (WON), specially infected WON with/without organ failure(OF) is limited.

Patients with symptomatic WON were divided into two groups of PCD and EUS-D, depending on the modality of drainage. Resolution of OF, adverse events, and other outcome measures were recorded. The two modalities were compared among infected WON sub-cohort and also degree of solid component (SC).

218 patients (175 males; 80.3%) were included who underwent either PCD (n = 102) or EUS-D (n = 116). Clinical success was significantly higher in the EUS-D group (92.1% vs 64.6%; p < 0.0001) and even for infected WON (n = 128) (p = 0.004), with higher (p = 0.007) and faster (p < 0.0001) OF resolution. Other outcome measures including mortality were significantly higher in the PCD group. Among subgroups, PCD with >40% SC had the worst clinical success/OF resolution rates, while EUS-D with <40% SC had the best outcomes.

EUS-D should be preferred over PCD in the management of WON, infected or otherwise, for higher clinical success, and higher/faster resolution of OF. PCD should be avoided in WON with>40% SC.

Surgical views with high resolution and magnification have enabled us to recognize the precise anatomical structures that can be used as landmarks during minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP). This study aimed to validate the usefulness of anatomy-based approaches for MIDP before and during the Expert Consensus Meeting: Precision Anatomy for Minimally Invasive HBP Surgery (February 24, 2021).

Twenty-five international MIDP experts developed clinical questions regarding surgical anatomy and approaches for MIDP. Studies identified via a comprehensive literature search were classified using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology. Online Delphi voting was conducted after experts had drafted the recommendations, with the goal of obtaining >75% consensus. Experts discussed the revised recommendations in front of the validation committee and an international audience of 384 attendees. Finalized recommendations were made after a second round of online Delphi voting.

Four clinical questions were addressed, resulting in 10 recommendations. All recommendations reached at least a 75% consensus among experts.

The expert consensus on precision anatomy for MIDP has been presented as a set of recommendations based on available evidence and expert opinions. These recommendations should guide experts and trainees in performing safe MIDP and foster its appropriate dissemination worldwide.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has potential advantages over its open equivalent open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) for pancreatic disease in the neck, body and tail. Within the United Kingdom (UK), there has been no previous experience describing the role of robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). This study evaluated differences between ODP, LDP and RDP.

Patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy performed in the Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery at the Freeman Hospital between September 2007 and December 2018 were included from a prospectively maintained database. The primary outcome measure was length of hospital stay, and the secondary outcome measures were complication rates graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.

Of the 125 patients, the median age was 61 years and 46% were male. Patients undergoing RDP (n = 40) had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists grading III compared to ODP (n = 38) and LDP (n = 47) (57% vs. 37% vs. 38%, P = 0.02). RDP had a slightly lower but not significant conversion rate (10% vs. 13%, P = 0.084), less blood loss (median: 0 vs. 250 ml, P < 0.001) and a higher rate of splenic preservation (30% vs. 2%, P < 0.001) and shorter operative time, once docking time excluded (284 vs. 300 min, P < 0.001) compared to LDP. RDP had a higher R0 resection rate than ODP and LDP (79% vs. 47% vs. 71%, P = 0.078) for neoplasms. RDP was associated with significantly shorter hospital stay than LDP and ODP (8 vs. 9 vs. 10 days, P = 0.001). While there was no significant different in overall complications across the groups, RDP was associated with lower rates of Grade C pancreatic fistula than ODP and LDP (2% vs. 5% vs. 6%, P = 0.194).

Minimally invasive pancreatic resection offers potential advantages over ODP, with a trend showing RDP to be marginally superior when compared to conventional LDP, but it is accepted that that this is likely to be at greater expense compared to the other current techniques.

Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is increasingly performed worldwide; however, the surgical anatomy required to safely perform MIDP has not yet been fully considered. This review evaluated the literature concerning peripancreatic vascular anatomy, which is considered important to conduct safe MIDP.

A database search of PubMed and Ichushi (Japanese) was conducted. Qualified studies investigating the anatomical variations of peripancreatic vessels related to MIDP were evaluated using SIGN methodology.

Of 701 articles yielded by our search strategy, 76 articles were assessed in this systematic review. The important vascular anatomy required to recognize MIDP included the pancreatic parenchymal coverage on the root and the running course of the splenic artery, branching patterns of the splenic artery, confluence positions of the left gastric vein and the inferior mesenteric vein, forms of pancreatic veins including the centro-inferior pancreatic vein, characteristics of the left renal vein, and collateral routes perfusing the spleen following Warshaw's technique. Very few articles evaluating the relationship between the anatomical variations and surgical outcomes of MIDP were found.

The precise knowledge of peripancreatic vessels is important to adequately complete MIDP. More detailed anatomic analyses and descriptions will benefit surgeons and their patients who are facing these operations.

Although laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) versus open approaches (ODP) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is associated with reduced morbidity, its impact on optimal adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) utilization remains unclear. Furthermore, it is uncertain whether oncologic resection quality markers are equivalent between approaches.

The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried between 2010 and 2016 for PDAC patients undergoing DP. Effect of LDP vs ODP and institutional case volumes on margin status, hospital stay, 30-day and 90-day mortality, administration of and delay to AC, and 30-day unplanned readmission were analyzed using binary and linear logistic regression. Cox multivariable regression was used to correct for confounders.

The search yielded 3411 patients; 996 (29.2%) had LDP and 2415 (70.8%) had ODP. ODP had higher odds of readmission [odds ratio (OR) 1.681, p = 0.01] and longer hospital stay [β 1.745, p = 0.004]. No difference was found for 30-day mortality [OR 1.689, p = 0.303], 90-day mortality [OR 1.936, p = 0.207], and overall survival [HR 1.231, p = 0.057]. The highest-volume centers had improved odds of AC [OR 1.275, p = 0.027] regardless of approach. LDP conferred lower margin positivity [OR 0.581, p = 0.005], increased AC use [3rd quartile: OR 1.844, p = 0.026; 4th quartile; OR 2.144, p = 0.045], and fewer AC delays [4th quartile: OR 0.786, p = 0.045] in higher-volume centers.

In selected patients, LDP offers an oncologically safe alternative to ODP for PDAC independent of institutional volume. However, additional oncologic benefit due to optimal AC utilization and lower positive margin rates in higher volume centers suggests that LDP by experienced teams can achieve best possible cancer outcomes.

Background/Aim: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the results of stapled closure of the pancreatic remnant after cold-knife section of the pancreatic isthmus and distal pancreatectomy for adenocarcinoma. Methods: A retrospective evaluation of 57 consecutive patients undergoing distal spleno-pancreatectomy for adenocarcinoma was performed. The pancreatic isthmus was systematically straight-sectioned with a cold knife, and the remnant was stapled close without additional stitches or adjuncts. The study's main endpoints were postoperative mortality, the occurrence of a pancreatic fistula, the need for a re-operation, the postoperative length of stay in the hospital, the rate of re-admission, and late survival. Results: Postoperative mortality was absent. Seventeen patients (29.8%) presented a pancreatic fistula of grade A in seven cases (41.2%), grade B in eight cases (47.1%), and grade C in two cases (11.8%). Re-operation was required in the two patients (3.5%) with grade C fistula in order to drain an intra-abdominal abscess. The mean postoperative length of stay in the hospital was 15 days (range, 6-62 days). No patient required re-admission. Twenty-nine patients (50.8%) were alive and free from disease, respectively, 12 patients (21.1%) at 12 months, 13 patients (22.8%) at 60 months, and four patients (7.0%) at 120 months from the operation. The remaining patients died of metastatic disease 9-37 months from the operation. Lastly, disease-related mortality was 49.1%. Conclusion: Stapler closure of the pancreatic remnant allows good postoperative results, limiting the formation of pancreatic fistula to the lower limit of its overall reported incidence.

Over the last decade, a number of practice-changing clinical trials have been published to guide the management of esophageal, gastric, liver, pancreas, appendiceal, and colorectal pathologies. The following review aims to provide a succinct summary of these important trials that merit further critical assessment by every gastrointestinal surgeon. After each review, per the Editors' request, the authors have provided their humble opinion as to the clinical context and application of the data.

Preservation of splenic vessels can minimize the risks of splenic infarction and gastric varices in laparoscopic spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy. A well-established procedure would provide high splenic vessels and spleen preservation rate. This study evaluated the outcomes and depending factors of laparoscopic splenic vessels and spleen preservation distal pancreatectomy (LsvspDP) via inferior-posterior splenic vein approach.

This retrospective study enrolled patients who underwent LsvspDP via inferior-posterior splenic vein approach in National Cheng-Kung University Hospital from February 2009 to June 2019. The clinic-pathologic data were collected and analyzed. The primary outcome of this study was the learning curve based on the cumulative sum analysis. The secondary outcomes were to evaluate the critical factors for the failure of splenic vessels and spleen preservation.

During the study period, a total of 64 patients received LsvspDP attempt. Splenic vessels were successfully preserved in 49 patients and the overall spleen preservation rate was 76.6%. According to cumulative sum analysis, the learning curve of LsvspDP was the 33rd case and several plateaus were observed during the learning curve phase. Old age (P=0.001), tail location (P=0.038), and large tumor (P=0.01) were independent risk factors of failed splenic vessels preservation, whereas the cut-off point of tumor size for prediction of spleen preservation was 5.4 cm. The complication rates were 7.8%, 7.8%, and 12.5% for Clavien grade I, II, and III, respectively, and 0% for Clavien grade IV or V. The rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula-grade B was 14.8%, among which the tail location was lower than the nontail location (0% vs. 24.3%; P=0.008). The mean value of operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay were 198±67 minutes, 139±242 mL, and 8.5±5.6 days, respectively.

In LsvspDP, the inferior-posterior splenic vein approach resulted in high splenic vessels and spleen preservation rate. Thirty-three patients were required to overcome the learning curve. Old age, tail location, and large tumor size were independent factors for the failure of splenic vessels preservation, whereas the cut-off value for tumor size was 5.4 cm to predict splenic vessels preservation.

The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the first evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) before and during the International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR) meeting in Miami (March 2019).

MIPR has seen rapid development in the past decade. Promising outcomes have been reported by early adopters from high-volume centers. Subsequently, multicenter series as well as randomized controlled trials were reported; however, guidelines for clinical practice were lacking.

The Scottisch Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used, incorporating these 4 items: systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to answer clinical questions, whenever possible in PICO style, the GRADE approach for assessment of the quality of evidence, the Delphi method for establishing consensus on the developed recommendations, and the AGREE-II instrument for the assessment of guideline quality and external validation. The current guidelines are cosponsored by the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery, Pancreas Club, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgery, the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, and the Society of Surgical Oncology.

After screening 16,069 titles, 694 studies were reviewed, and 291 were included. The final 28 recommendations covered 6 topics; laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy, central pancreatectomy, pancreatoduodenectomy, as well as patient selection, training, learning curve, and minimal annual center volume required to obtain optimal outcomes and patient safety.

The IG-MIPR using SIGN methodology give guidance to surgeons, hospital administrators, patients, and medical societies on the use and outcome of MIPR as well as the approach to be taken regarding this challenging type of surgery.

Minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) has been expanding in the past decade. Excellent outcomes have been reported, however, safety concerns exist. The aim of this study was to define prerequisites for performing MIPR with the objective to guide safe implementation of MIPR into clinical practice.

This systematic review was conducted as part of the 2019 Miami International Evidence-Based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR). PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for literature concerning the implementation of MIPR between 1946 and November 2018. Quality assessment was according to The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN).

Overall, 1150 studies were screened, of which 32 studies with 8519 patients were included in this systematic review. Training programs for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy, laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy have been described with acceptable outcomes during the learning curve and improved outcomes after training. Learning curve studies have revealed an association between growing experience and improving perioperative outcomes. In addition, the association between higher center volume and lower mortality and morbidity has been reported by several studies.

When embarking on MIPR, it is recommended to participate in a dedicated training program, to assure a sufficient volume, especially when implementing minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy, (20 procedures recommended annually), and prospectively collect and closely monitor outcomes for continuous quality assessment, this can be achieved through institutional databases and participation in national or international registries.

Minimally invasive endopancreatic surgery (EPS), performing a pancreatic resection from inside the pancreatic duct, has been proposed as an experimental alternative to duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection in benign diseases such as chronic pancreatitis, but is complicated by difficult spatial orientation when trying to reach structures of interest. This study assessed the feasibility and potential benefits of image-guided EPS using a computer-assisted navigation system in artificial pancreas silicon model.

A surgical navigation system displayed a 3D reconstruction of the original computed tomography (CT) scan and the endoscope in relation to a selected target structure. In a first step, different surface landmark (LM)-based and intraparenchymal LM-based approaches for image-to-physical space registration were evaluated. The accuracy of registration was measured as fiducial registration error (FRE). Subsequently, intrapancreatic lesions (n = 8) that were visible on preoperative imaging, but not on the endoscopic view, were targeted with a computer-assisted, image-guided endopancreatic resection technique in pancreas silicon models. After each experiment, a CT scan was obtained for measurement of the shortest distance from the resection cavity to the centre of the lesion.

Intraparenchymal LM registration [FRE 2.24 mm (1.40-2.85)] was more accurate than surface LM registration [FRE 3.46 mm (2.25-4.85); p = 0.035], but not more accurate than combined registration of intraparenchymal and surface LM [FRE 2.46 mm (1.60-3.35); p = 0.052]. Using image-guided EPS, six of seven lesions were successfully targeted. The median distance from the resection cavity to the centre of the lesion on CT was 1.52 mm (0-2.4). In one pancreas, a lesion could not be resected due to the fragility of the pancreas model.

Image-guided minimally invasive EPS using a computer-assisted navigation system enabled successful targeting of pancreatic lesions that were invisible on the endoscopic image, but detectable on preoperative imaging. In the clinical setting, this tool could facilitate complex minimally invasive and robotic pancreatic procedures.

Introduction. Despite the widespread use of the robotic technology, only a few studies with small sample sizes report its application to pancreatic diseases treatment. Our aim is to present the results of a multicenter study on the safety and feasibility of robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RDP). Materials and Methods. All RDPs for benign, borderline, and malignant diseases performed in 5 referral centers from 2008 to 2016 were included. Perioperative outcomes were evaluated. Results. Two hundred thirty-six patients were included. Spleen preservation was performed in 114 cases (48.3%). Operative time was 277.8 ± 93.6 minutes. Progressive improvement in operative time was observed over the study period. Conversion rate was 6.3%. Morbidity occurred in 102 cases (43.2%), mainly due to grade A fistulas. Reoperation was required in 10 patients. Postoperatively, 2 patients died of sepsis due to a grade C fistula. Hospital readmission was necessary in 11 cases. A R0 resection was always achieved, with a mean number of 16.2 ± 15 harvested lymph nodes. Conclusion. To our knowledge, this is one of the largest RDP series. Safety and feasibility including the low conversion rate, the high spleen preservation rate, the adequate operative time, and the acceptable morbidity and mortality rates confirm the validity of this technique. Appropriate oncological outcomes have been also obtained.

Postoperative pancreatic collection (POPC) is a frequent complication after pancreatectomy. Although percutaneous drainage (PD) has been the treatment of choice for POPC with encapsulation, endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural drainage (EUS-TD) was recently reported effective for this condition. The main aim of this retrospective study was to compare EUS-TD and PD in terms of effectiveness and safety as the first procedure in patients with noncapsulated POPC.

Consecutive patients who underwent pancreatectomy and developed noncapsulated POPC requiring EUS-TD or PD between April 2003 and May 2018 were enrolled. Noncapsulated POPC was defined as pancreatic collection appearing within 28 days postoperatively and lacking a thick encapsulating inflammatory wall on contrast-enhanced computed tomography. The effectiveness of drainage was compared between the two groups before and after propensity-score matching of patient characteristics. Outcomes of interest included re-intervention rate, number of re-interventions, immediate complication, remote complication, and time to clinical resolution after the procedure.

A sum of 81 patients were included: 14 underwent EUS-TD, and 67 underwent PD. There were significant differences between groups in POPC size and type of surgery. Propensity-score matching selected 13 patients who underwent EUS-TD and 28 who underwent PD. Re-intervention rate (p = 0.045), and number of re-interventions (p = 0.026) were significantly lower in the matched EUS-TD group than in the matched PD group. There were no significant between-group differences in immediate complication and remote complication. The time to clinical resolution after the procedure was significantly shorter in the matched EUS-TD than in the matched PD group (14 versus 26 days; p < 0.0001).

EUS-TD is more effective than PD for drainage of noncapsulated POPC. EUS-TD should be considered as the first treatment of choice for noncapsulated POPC visible on EUS.

Distal pancreatectomy (DP) accounts for 25% of all pancreatic resections. Complications following DP occur in around 40% of the cases. Our aim is to analyze short-term surgical outcomes of DP based on whether the indication for resection was benign or malignant pathology, as well as the effect of the surgical approach, open versus laparoscopic on morbidity and mortality.

We studied all patients undergoing DP from the National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) targeted pancreatectomy participant use file from 2014 to 2016. The patients were divided into 2 groups, those who underwent DP for benign diseases (DP-B) and those who underwent DP for malignant diseases (DP-M). We performed multivariate logistic regression to evaluate the association between benign or malignant distal pancreatectomies and 30-day outcomes. We included clinically and/or statistically significant confounders into the models. We also conducted the same analysis in the subgroups of open and laparoscopic DP.

Three thousand five hundred and seventy-nine patients underwent distal pancreatectomy. The most common indication for surgery was malignant disease in 1894 (53%). Thirty-day mortality occurred in 0.4% of DP-B compared to 1.3% DP-M. On multivariate analysis, no significant difference was found in mortality or in the risk of pancreatic fistula between the 2 groups. Bleeding (p = 0.002) and composite morbidity (p = 0.01) were significantly higher in the DP-M group. Among composite morbidities, thromboembolism was significantly associated with DP-M (OR 2.1, p = 0.0004) only when performed with an open approach.

DP-M is associated with a significantly higher risk of post-operative bleeding, thromboembolism, and sepsis compared to DP-B but no significant increase in mortality. When further analyzing the impact of the operative approach on morbidity, there was an increased rate of post-operative thromboembolic in the DP-M group when the surgery was performed in an open manner and this increased risk was no longer statistically significant if the DP-M was performed using a minimally invasive approach.

Recently, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has become the standard procedure for resection of left-sided pancreatic tumors. Fluid collection (FC) at the resection margin of the pancreatic stump after LDP is a frequent radiological finding. However, there have been few treatment guidelines and the optimal management for this clinical finding is unclear. The aim of present study is to define the incidence of FC and suggest the optimal management for FC after LDP.

A total of 1227 patients who underwent LDP between March 2005 and December 2015 were collected. FC was considered present when the longest diameter of the lesion on CT scan was > 3 cm.

A follow-up with at least two CT image was available for 1102 patients. Of these, 689 (62.5%) patients showed initial fluid collection (IFC) at the pancreas resection site in immediate postoperative CT. IFC (+) group had higher proportion of men, BMI, and higher rate of concomitant splenectomy than IFC (-) group. Among patients with FC after LDP, the treatment group had more frequent leukocytosis and accompanying symptoms than the observation group. Seventy-seven patients underwent therapeutic interventions for FC after LDP. Among them, 55 (71.4%) patients underwent endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastrocystostomy (EUS-GC). EUS-GC group had a higher success rate (85.6 vs. 63.6%, p < 0.033) and shorter hospital stay after the intervention (5.2 vs. 13.3 days, p < 0.001) than those who underwent other procedures.

High BMI, male, and concomitant splenectomy contribute to the occurrence of FC after LDP. In most cases, FC after LDP resolved spontaneously over time with observation. The patients with symptomatic FC ultimately required treatment. EUS-GC is the optimal intervention therapy for FC after LDP.

The centralization of complex surgical procedures is associated with better postoperative outcomes. However, little is known about the impact of hospital volume on the outcome after distal pancreatectomy.

Using the French national hospital discharge database, we identified all patients having undergone distal pancreatectomy in France between 2012 and 2015. A spline model was applied to determine the caseload cut-off in annual distal pancreatectomy that influenced 90-day postoperative mortality.

A total of 3314 patients were identified. Use of a spline model did not reveal a cut-off in the annual distal pancreatectomy caseload. By taking the median number of distal pancreatectomy (n = 5) and the third quartile (n = 15), we stratified centers into low, intermediate, and high hospital volume groups. The overall postoperative mortality rate was 3.0% and did not differ significantly between these groups. In a multivariable analysis, age, Charlson comorbidity score, septic complications, hemorrhage, shock, and reoperation were independently associated with a greater overall risk of death. However, hospital volume had no impact on mortality after distal pancreatectomy (odds ratio, 0.954; 95% confidence interval, 0.552-1.651, P = 0.867).

Hospital volume does not seem to influence mortality after distal pancreatectomy in France, and centralization may not necessarily improve outcomes.

The economic implications of relevant clinicopathologic factors on the surgical approach to distal pancreatectomy (DP) should be clearly defined and understood to potentially allow the implementation of cost reduction strategies.

Administrative and clinical datasets of patients undergoing a DP between 2012 and 2016 were merged and queried. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify clinicopathologic predictors of cost differentials for minimally invasive DP (MIDP) relative to open DP (ODP). Time trends in cost were also assessed to identify opportunities for cost containment.

Among two hundred and twenty five patients, 128 underwent an ODP (57%) and 97 a MIDP (43%). The DP groups were comparable with regard to relevant perioperative and disease characteristics. Total hospitalization and total OR costs for MIDP were significantly lower (- 12%, P = 0.0048) and higher (+ 16%, P < 0.0001) respectively, compared to ODP. On univariate analysis, age > 60 (- 12%, P = 0.0262), BMI > 25 (- 10%, P = 0.0222), ASA class ≥ 3 (- 11%, P = 0.0045), OpTime > 230 min (- 16%, P = 0.0004), and T stage ≥ 3 (- 8%, P = 0.0452) were associated with decreased total costs after MIDP compared to ODP. Linear regression analysis revealed that BMI > 25 (Estimate - 0.31, SE 0.15, P = 0.0482), ASA class ≥ 3 (Estimate - 0.36, SE 0.17, P = 0.0344), and T stage ≥ 3 (Estimate - 0.57, SE 0.26, P = 0.0320) were associated with decreased hospitalization costs after MIDP compared to ODP. Overtime, total hospitalization cost for MIDP increased from - 21 to 1% (P = 0.0197), while OR costs for MIDP decreased from + 41% to - 2% (P = 0.0049), nearly equalizing the cost differences between ODP and MIDP.

Relevant clinicopathologic factors predicted decreased hospitalization costs after MIDP relative to ODP. In equivalent stages of disease, optimizing the surgical approach to DP based on specific clinicopathologic characteristics may afford significant cost-saving opportunities.

Laparoscopic left-sided pancreatectomy (LLP) is an increasingly used surgical technique for the treatment of benign and malignant lesions of the left side of the pancreas. The results of LLP as a treatment for primary pancreatic lesions of the head and tail of the pancreas were evaluated.

From November 2011 to November 2017, 18 patients underwent surgery for primary lesions of the pancreas by means of a laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. An intra-abdominal drain tube was used in all cases, and the recommendations of the International Study Group for Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF) were followed.

The mean age was 66.5years (IQR 46-74). Among the 18 left pancreatectomies performed, four were with splenic preservation, and one was a central pancreatectomy. There were two conversions. The median surgical time was 247.5minutes (IQR 242-275). The median postoperative hospital stay was 7days (IQR 6-8). After 90days, complications were detected in five patients: three gradeII, one gradeIII and one gradeV according to the modified Clavien-Dindo classification. There was one gradeB pancreatic fistula, and four patients had to be readmitted to hospital because of peripancreatic collections. The anatomic pathology diagnosis was malignant neoplasm in 38.9% of cases, all of them with negative resection margins.

LLP can be considered the technique of choice in the treatment of primary benign pancreatic lesions and an alternative to the open approach in selected patients diagnosed with malignant pancreatic lesions.

The use of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is increasing worldwide. It is important for surgeons to predict preoperatively the difficulty and risks of a surgery. However, very few reports have evaluated the impact of patient or tumor factors on the difficulty of LDP. We aimed to determine the predictors of technical difficulties when performing LDP.

This study included 34 patients who underwent LDP. Patient information was obtained retrospectively and included age, gender, BMI, primary disease, previous abdominal surgery, previous pancreatitis, tumor size, tumor proximity to the splenic arterial origin, type of splenic artery (SpA), operative time, blood loss, postoperative pancreatic fistula, and length of hospital stay. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the predictors of a long operative time. SpA anatomy was classified into two types based on the relationship between its origin and the pancreas. Patients whose SpA origin was upward of the pancreatic parenchyma were classified as SpA type 1, whereas patients whose SpA origin was covered by the pancreatic parenchyma were classified as SpA type 2.

Multivariate analysis revealed SpA type 2 to be an independent risk factor for a long operation (odds ratio = 9.925; 95% confidence interval: 1.461-67.412; P = 0.019). SpA type 2 was related to a longer operative time (P < 0.001) and greater intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.001).

Classification according to SpA type is simple and useful for predicting technical difficulty when performing LDP.

Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is associated with improved peri-operative outcomes compared to the open approach, though cost-effectiveness of MIDP remains unclear.

Patients with pancreatic tumors undergoing open (ODP), robotic (RDP), or laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) between 2012-2014 were identified through the Truven Health MarketScan® Database. Median costs (payments) for the index operation and 90-day readmissions were calculated. Multivariable regression was used to predict associations with log 90-day payments.

693 patients underwent ODP, 146 underwent LDP, and 53 RDP. Compared to ODP, LDP and RDP resulted in shorter median length of stay (6 d. ODP vs. 5 d. RDP vs. 4 d. LDP, p<0.01) and lower median payments ($38,350 ODP vs. $34,870 RDP vs. $32,148 LDP, p<0.01) during the index hospitalization. Total median 90-day payments remained significantly lower for both minimally invasive approaches ($40,549 ODP vs. $35,160 RDP vs. $32,797 LDP, p<0.01). On multivariable analysis, LDP and RDP resulted in 90-day cost savings of 21% and 25% relative to ODP, equating to an amount of $8,500-$10,000.

MIDP is associated with >$8,500 in lower cost compared to the open approach. Quality improvement initiatives in DP should ensure that lack of training and technical skill are not barriers to MIDP.