540 likes | 563 Views
Learn about the benefits of spleen preservation in distal pancreatectomy surgery for better immunity and health outcomes, avoiding risks associated with splenectomy. Explore surgical techniques, indications, and postoperative considerations.
E N D
Spleen-Preserving Distal Pancreatectomy Traian Dumitrascu Dan Setlacec Center of General Surgery and Liver Transplant Fundeni Clinical Institute Bucharest
Introduction • Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP): • an alternative procedure to distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy • for benign/ low-grade malignant tumors of the pancreatic body • removal of the spleen during distal pancreatectomy was associated with increased postoperative morbidity • the role of the spleen in immunity was clearly demonstrated by experimental and clinical studies Shoup, Arch Surg, 2002; Ionescu, Chirurgia, 2003; Fernandez-Cruz, HPB (Oxford), 2005; Tiron & Vasilescu, Chirurgia, 2008; Dumitrascu, Dig Surg, 2012; Lacatus, Chirurgia, 2013
Introduction • WHY Spleen-preservation? • Spleen play a key role in: • mechanical filtration, which removes senescent erythrocytes • maintenance of normal immune function and host defenses against certain types of infectious agents • prevention of infection in children • avoid overwhelming postsplenectomy infection (OPSI): S. pneumoniae, H. influenze, N. meningitidis • major site of production for the opsonins: properdin and tuftsin (bactericide and anti tumor activity) Removal of the spleen results in loss of both the immunologic and filtering functions Ionescu, Chirurgia, 2003; Tiron & Vasilescu, Chirurgia, 2008;Lacatus, Chirurgia, 2013 Vasilescu, Splina. De la laparoscopie la chirurgia robotica si inapoi, Ed. Medicala, 2016
Introduction • What are the risks following splenectomy? • Infectious risks- OPSI • The highest risk in the first 2 years • Mortality – up to 46% • Non-infectious risks : • Arterial events • Thromboembolic events • Pulmonary hypertension • Developing cancer Dragomir, Chirurgia, 2016
SPDP • PRO: • the role of the spleen in immunity • better endocrine function preservation • removal of the spleen during distal pancreatectomy was associated with increased postoperative morbidity • the major concern after splenectomy is overwhelming postsplenectomy infection (OPSI) • CONS: • more technically challenging • increased morbidity Shoup, Arch Surg, 2002; Ionescu, Chirurgia, 2003; Fernandez-Cruz, HPB (Oxford), 2005; Tiron & Vasilescu, Chirurgia, 2008; Dumitrascu, Dig Surg, 2012; Lacatus, Chirurgia, 2013
Anatomy - arteries Mikami, Diseases of the Pancreas, Springer-Verlag, 2008
Anatomy - veins Mikami, Diseases of the Pancreas, Springer-Verlag, 2008 7
Technique Warshaw, Arch Surg, 1988; Warshaw, J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2010 8
Technique Fernandez-Cruz, Atlas of Advanced Operative Surgery, Elsevier, 2013 9
Technique Fernandez-Cruz, Atlas of Advanced Operative Surgery, Elsevier, 2013 10
Technique Kimura, Surgery, 1996
Technique Fernandez-Cruz, Atlas of Advanced Operative Surgery, Elsevier, 2013 12
Technique Spleen SA PV SV Pancreas Head VMS SPDP – final aspect
Technique Fundeni Clinical Institute: 41 SPDP – 6 minimally-invasive (2 laparoscopic; 4 robotic)
Indications T Ferrone & Warshaw, Ann Surg, 2011
Indications Serous cystadenoma
Indications Neuroendocrine neoplasm G1
Indications Solid pseudopapillary tumor
Indications Grawitz metastasis
Indications 2012 23
Morbidity • Early morbidity • 22 - 46% • Splenectomy rate (1.9 – 5.2%) Ferrone & Warshaw, Ann Surg, 2011; Tien, Ann Surg Oncol, 2010; Shoup, Arch Surg, 2002
Long-term Outcome • Perigastric varices – up to 30% 29
Discussion • Estimated blood loss higher for: • SPDP (Ma JP, Chinese Med J, 2011) • DPS (Shoup M, Arch Surg, 2002) • No difference (Nau P, Gastroenterology Research and Practice, 2009; Lee SE, J Korean Med Sci, 2008; Tezuka K, Dig Surg, 2012; Tsiouris A, HPB, 2011; Kimura W, J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2010; Choi SH, Surg Endosc, 2012) • Overall complications rate higher for: • DPS (Carrere N, World J Surg, 2006; Choi SH, Surg Endosc, 2012) • No difference (Nau P, Gastroenterology Research and Practice, 2009; Lee SE, J Korean Med Sci, 2008; Tezuka K, Dig Surg, 2012; Tsiouris A, HPB, 2011; Kimura W, J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2010) • Infectious complications higher for • DPS (Shoup M, Arch Surg, 2002; Benoist S, JACS, 1999; Choi SH, Surg Endosc, 2012) • No difference (Nau P, Gastroenterology Research and Practice, 2009; Lee SE, J Korean Med Sci, 2008; Tezuka K, Dig Surg, 2012; Tsiouris A, HPB, 2011; Kimura W, J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2010) • Diabetes rate is lower for • SPDP (Fernandez-Cruz L, HPB, 2005; Govil S, Br J Surg, 1999) • no differences (Carrere N, World J Surg, 2006; Lee SE, J Korean Med Sci, 2008; Kimura W, J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2010) T IVC Mp SMV PV SMV SMA CT SMA
T IVC Mp SMV PV SMV SMA CT SMA
T IVC Mp SMV PV SMV SMA CT SMA
Discussion T Ma JP, Chinese Med J, 2011 IVC Mp Lee SE, J Korean Med Sci, 2008 SMV PV SMV SMA Tsiouris A, HPB, 2011 CT SMA Kimura W, J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2010
Fundeni Clinical Institute Experience • Indications • Postoperative morbidity - infectious • Long-term results
Patients & Methods Fundeni Clinical Institute 2000 – 2015 41 patients with SPDP
Results • Median age: 41 years (18 – 76) • Sex ratio F/M = 2.4/1 (29/12) • Median BMI: 25 kg/m2 (19 – 42) • Symptoms: • Present – 37 pts (90%) • Epigastric pain – 27 pts • Hypoglycemia – 9 pts • Absent – 4 pts
Results • Pancreas texture: soft – 35 pts (85%) • Median operative time: • 150 min (70 – 330)
Results • Blood loss: • Median intraoperative blood loss: 150 ml (50 – 300 ml) • 1 pts with intraoperative transfusions • Postoperative transfusions – 6 pts (14%)
Results • Morbidity – 14 pts (34%) • Mortality – 0 pts • POPF – 13 pts (32%): • Grade A – 6 pts • Grade B – 5 pts • Grade C – 2 pts • Postoperative hemorrhage – 5 pts (12%) • Delayed gastric empting – 5 pts (12%)
Results • Re-laparotomy for complications – 5 pts (12%): • POPF grade C – 2 pts (2 pts with POH) • PO Hemorrhage alone – 2 pts • Abdominal abscess – 1 pt • Cave: 1 pt – splenectomy
Results • Median tumor diameter: 3.5 cm (0.4 – 14) • Pathology: • Benign/ low-grade malignant – 37 pts • Malignant – 4 pts
Results • Serous cystadenoma – 6 pts • Mucinous cystadenoma – 3 pts • NET G1/ G2 – 15 pts • Non-functional: 5 pts • Insulinoma: 9 pts • Gastrinoma: 1 pt • Solid pseudopapillary tumor – 6 pt • Focal chronic pancreatitis – 5 pt • Malignant – 3 pt • Metastases of other neoplasia – 1 pts
Results • Median follow-up: 65 months (1 – 177) • Functional results (34 pts): • Diabetes mellitus – 6 pts (17%) • Exocrine pancreatic insufficiency – 2 pts (6%)
T IVC Mp SMV PV SMV SMA CT SMA Dumitrascu, Dig Surg, 2012
T IVC Mp SMV PV SMV SMA CT SMA
T IVC Mp SMV PV SMV SMA CT SMA Dumitrascu, J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2014
T IVC Mp SMV PV SMV SMA CT SMA Dumitrascu, J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2014
T IVC Mp SMV PV SMV SMA CT SMA Dumitrascu, J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2014
T IVC Mp SMV PV SMV SMA CT SMA Dumitrascu, J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2014
T IVC Mp SMV PV SMV SMA CT SMA Dumitrascu, J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2014