4.6 Article

The detail of the en bloc technique and prognosis of spleen-preserving laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12957-015-0735-y

关键词

Spleen-preserving; Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy; Pancreatic cancer

资金

  1. Beijing Municipal Administration of Hospitals Clinical Medicine Development of Special Funding Support [XMLX201309]
  2. Japan-China Sasakawa Medical Fellowship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Although laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy surgery is more and more popular, the reports about the en bloc technique used for pancreatic cancer were still rare. The aim of our study was to illustrate the detail of the spleen-preserving en bloc technique as well as the short-term and long-term outcomes. Methods: The detail of the en bloc technique with pictures was described. The prognosis of the successive 23 cases that underwent the laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) surgery was evaluated. Results: There were 17 cases that underwent spleen-preserving LDP while six cases underwent spleen-resecting LDP. The average surgery time was 203 +/- 54 min, and the average blood loss volume was 208 +/- 264 ml; one case transferred to open surgery because of severe adhesion. The complication rate was 47 % (n = 8) shortly after surgery. Pancreatic fistula rate was 41 % (n = 7). No lethal case occurred. The average diameter of the tumor was 32 +/- 12 mm. The average number of the lymph nodes obtained was 19.8 +/- 9.3. All the cutting edges were negative. Survival rates of the patient after 1, 3, and 5 years are 64.7, 52.9, and 41.2 %, respectively. These records showed no statistical significance compared with spleen-resecting LDP and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) surgeries. Conclusions: The en bloc spleen-preserving LDP can be performed by experienced surgeons. This surgery has good short-term and long-term outcomes.

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