4.6 Article

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy employing radical en bloc procedure for adenocarcinoma: Technical details and outcomes

期刊

SURGERY
卷 157, 期 6, 页码 1106-1112

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2014.12.015

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Although laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has increasingly gained popularity, there are only a few reports mentioning application and outcomes of LDP for adenocarcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas. The aim of our study is to demonstrate technical details of LDP employing radical en bloc procedure (en bloc LDP) and to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of en bloc LDP applied for adenocarcinoma. Methods. We evaluated 23 consecutive patients who underwent LDP for adenocarcinoma in the body or tail of the pancreas. Our concepts of en bloc LDP for adenocarcinoma comprise 3 principles: en bloc removal of retroperitoneal structures, lymph node (LN) dissection, and preservation of the spleen. Results. En bloc LDP without splenectomy was performed in 17 patients (74%) and en bloc LDP with splenectomy was in 6 patients (26%). Mean +/- standard deviation operation time was 203 +/- 54 minutes, and mean estimated blood loss was 208 +/- 264 mL. Conversion to open distal pancreatectomy was required in I patient (4%) owing to the severe adhesions around the pancreas. The overall morbidity rate following en bloc LDP was 47% (n = 11), and the rate of pancreatic fistula was 39% (n = 9). There were no 30-day or in-hospital mortalities. Mean tumor size was 32 +/- 12 mm, and mean number of harvested LNs was 19.8 +/- 9.3. No patient had positive margins on final histologic diagnosis. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 67%, 49%, and 33 %, respectively. Conclusion. En bloc LDP can be applied safely by the surgeon with advanced experience in minimally invasive surgery with satisfactory short- and long-term outcomes, supporting further application of LDP for adenocarcinoma with advances in operative techniques and technological innovations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据