Search

Otherwise, the splenic artery has abundant elastic fibers within vessel walls and usually runs apart from the pancreatic parenchyma, making the dissection of the splenic artery easier.[6] Thus, the MW method can be implemented without any difference, either in operation time or bleeding, compared with the Warshaw method. Keywords: Pancreatectomy; Splenic infarction; Esophageal and gastric varices; Laparoscopy; Warshaw technique EN Pancreatectomy Splenic infarction Esophageal and gastric varices Laparoscopy Warshaw technique 1556 1558 3 06/16/21 20210601 NES 210601 Introduction There are two main laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) methods, depending on the preservation of splenic vessels. [Extracted from the article]

Introduction: Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) can be performed either by ligating (SPDP-VL) or preserving (SPDP-VP) the splenic vessels.Methods: A systematic review was performed, and standard PRISMA guidelines were followed. A literature search was conducted using Medline, PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials between January 1988 and May 2014. The article titles and abstracts were examined by two independent reviewers.Results: Thirteen non-randomized control trials were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled data included 667 patients who underwent SPDP. There were 209 patients in the SPDP-VL group and 458 patients in the SPDP-VP group. The risk of splenic infarction was significantly higher in the SPDP-VL group [20.88 vs. 2.09%; OR 11.89 (95% CI 4.33 to 32.70); p < 0.00001]. The rate of splenectomy as a result of splenic infarction was also statistically associated with SPDP-VL [7.69% vs. 1.36%; OR 3.87 (95% CI 1.05 to 14.26); p = 0.05)]. The surgical operative time was shorter in the SPDP-VL group than in the SPDP-VP group (mean difference 21.2 min), but this result was not statistically significant (95% CI -47.01 to -4.48; p = 0.11). The two procedures were comparable with respect to mean intraoperative blood loss and rate of pancreatic fistula. SPDP-VL did not influence the risk of developing perigastric collateral vessels and submucosal varices.Conclusions: SPDP-VL may result in a higher rate of splenic infarction and splenectomy than SPDP-VP. However, the low quality of the included studies does not lead to clear conclusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/objectives Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) for low-grade malignant pancreas tumors was recently demonstrated. Although the procedure with splenic vessel preservation (SVP) is optimal for LSPDP, SVP is not always possible in patients with a large tumor or a tumor attached to splenic vessels. This study aimed to analyze the safety of two procedures: LSPDP without SVP, known as the Warshaw technique (lap-WT), and LSPDP with SVP (lap-SVP). Methods Seventeen patients who underwent a lap-WT and seven patients who underwent a lap-SVP were investigated retrospectively. Results The median follow-up duration was 45 (range 17–105) months. In the lap-WT and lap-SVP patients, the sizes of the tumors were 5 (1.3–12) and 1.5 (1–4) cm; the operative times were 304 (168–512) and 319 (238–387) min; the blood loss was 210 (5–3250) and 60 (9–210) gr; the length of the postoperative hospital stay was 15 (8–29) and 18 (5–24) days; the peak platelet counts were 37.2 (14.6–65.2) and 26.4 (18.8–41) × 10 4 /μL, and splenomegaly was observed in 10 (59%) and three (43%) patients, respectively. In both procedures, there was no local recurrence. In the lap-WT group, splenic infarctions were seen in four (24%) patients and perigastric varices were seen in two (12%) patients. All of these patients were observed conservatively. Conclusions Both the lap-WT and lap-SVP were found to be safe and effective, and in cases in which the tumor is relatively large or close to the splenic vessels, lap-WT can be used as the more appropriate procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]