Search

Background: There are several reports on the safety and feasibility of pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) without reconstruction of the small remnant pancreas. However, a few studies have explored central pancreatectomy (CP) for non-reconstructed small remnant pancreases after PD. This study presents a case of CP without pancreatic reconstruction after PD. Case presentation: A 58-year-old man with cerebral palsy underwent PD for distal cholangiocarcinoma. Three years postoperatively, a 12-mm tumor was detected in the remnant pancreatic body and diagnosed as a pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm. Surgical resection was performed, because the tumor was enlarged and chemotherapy resistant. The afferent loop with pancreatojejunostomy anastomosis was dissected, and CP, including pancreatojejunostomy anastomosis, was performed. Given the remnant pancreas was hard and atrophic, the pancreatic tail was transected using a stapler without reconstructing the small remnant pancreas. The patient experienced no postoperative complications including postoperative pancreatic fistula, and the endocrine function of the pancreas was preserved. Conclusions: We present a case of remnant pancreatic CP that did not require reconstruction after PD. Preservation of the small remnant pancreas without reconstruction during CP may be feasible to maintain endocrine function in select patients after PD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Surgery for lesions of the proximal part of the pancreatic body or neck can be challenging, and when enucleation is not possible, central pancreatectomy is an option. Laparoscopic central pancreatic resection is rarely described worldwide; it is considered a difficult procedure mainly because of the risk of double pancreatic fistula developing at two sites of resection. However, it seems to be an excellent alternative to distal pancreatectomy or pancreaticoduodenectomy, with the advantages of preserving functioning parenchyma and reducing endocrine and exocrine failure. Nevertheless, patients with pancreatic lesions requiring central resection are often managed with the open approach in many hospitals due to the complexity of total laparoscopic central pancreatectomy, which requires advanced laparoscopic skills, expertise and experience. Here, we report a case of a 29-year-old female who underwent total laparoscopic central pancreatic resection with gastro-pancreatic anastomosis for symptomatic serous cystadenoma. We discuss the details of case management and review the relevant literature.

Complete surgical resection in the context of a multimodal approach has been associated with excellent long-term survival in children diagnosed with pancreatoblastoma (PB). Traditionally, curative intent surgery for PB implies standard pancreatic resections such as pancreaticoduodenectomies and distal pancreatectomies with splenectomies, surgical procedures that may lead to significant long-term pancreatic functional deficiencies. Postoperative pancreatic functional deficiencies are particularly interesting to children because they may interfere with their development, considering their long life expectancy and the significant role of pancreatic functions in their nutritional status and growth. Thus, organ-sparing pancreatectomies, such as spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomies and central pancreatectomies, are emerging in specific tumoral pathologies in children. However, data about organ-sparing pancreatectomies’ potential role in curative-intent PB surgery in children are scarce. Based on the literature data, the current review aims to present the early and late outcomes of pancreatectomies in children (including long-term deficiencies and their potential impact on the development and quality of life), particularly for PB, and further explore the potential role of organ-sparing pancreatectomies for PB. Organ-sparing pancreatectomies are associated with better long-term pancreatic functional outcomes, particularly central pancreatectomies, and have a reduced impact on children’s development and quality of life without jeopardizing their oncological safety. The long-term preservation of pancreatic functions should not be disregarded when performing pancreatectomies for PB in children. A subset of patients with PB might benefit from organ-sparing pancreatectomies, particularly from central pancreatectomies, with the same oncological results as standard pancreatectomies but with significantly less impact on long-term functional outcomes.

Background: Central pancreatectomy is a surgical procedure for benign and low-grade malignant tumors which located in the neck and proximal body of the pancreas that facilitates the preservation of pancreatic endocrine and exocrine functions but has a high morbidity rate, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness between minimally invasive central pancreatectomy (MICP) and open central pancreatectomy (OCP) basing on perioperative outcomes. Methods: An extensive literature search to compare MICP and OCP was conducted from October 2003 to October 2023 on PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Fixed-effect models or random effects were selected based on heterogeneity, and pooled odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Results: A total of 10 studies with a total of 510 patients were included. There was no significant difference in POPF between MICP and OCP (OR = 0.95; 95% CI [0.64, 1.43]; P = 0.82), whereas intraoperative blood loss (MD = − 125.13; 95% CI [− 194.77, -55.49]; P < 0.001) and length of hospital stay (MD = − 2.86; 95% CI [− 5.00, − 0.72]; P = 0.009) were in favor of MICP compared to OCP, and there was a strong trend toward a lower intraoperative transfusion rate in MICP than in OCP (MD = 0.34; 95% CI [0.11, 1.00]; P = 0.05). There was no significant difference in other outcomes between the two groups. Conclusion: MICP was as safe and effective as OCP and had less intraoperative blood loss and a shorter length of hospital stay. However, further studies are needed to confirm the results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Complete surgical resection in the context of a multimodal approach has been associated with excellent long-term survival in children diagnosed with pancreatoblastoma (PB). Traditionally, curative intent surgery for PB implies standard pancreatic resections such as pancreaticoduodenectomies and distal pancreatectomies with splenectomies, surgical procedures that may lead to significant long-term pancreatic functional deficiencies. Postoperative pancreatic functional deficiencies are particularly interesting to children because they may interfere with their development, considering their long life expectancy and the significant role of pancreatic functions in their nutritional status and growth. Thus, organ-sparing pancreatectomies, such as spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomies and central pancreatectomies, are emerging in specific tumoral pathologies in children. However, data about organ-sparing pancreatectomies' potential role in curative-intent PB surgery in children are scarce. Based on the literature data, the current review aims to present the early and late outcomes of pancreatectomies in children (including long-term deficiencies and their potential impact on the development and quality of life), particularly for PB, and further explore the potential role of organ-sparing pancreatectomies for PB. Organ-sparing pancreatectomies are associated with better long-term pancreatic functional outcomes, particularly central pancreatectomies, and have a reduced impact on children's development and quality of life without jeopardizing their oncological safety. The long-term preservation of pancreatic functions should not be disregarded when performing pancreatectomies for PB in children. A subset of patients with PB might benefit from organ-sparing pancreatectomies, particularly from central pancreatectomies, with the same oncological results as standard pancreatectomies but with significantly less impact on long-term functional outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The purpose of this study is to examine and analyse the outcomes and patient experiences associated with laparoscopic central pancreatectomy. Methods: The perioperative data of 16 patients who underwent laparoscopic central pancreatectomy were retrospectively analysed at Ningbo Medical Center Lihuili Hospital (Xingning Branch and Eastern Branch) from September 2017 to July 2023. Results: All surgical procedures were completed without the need for intraoperative conversion to open surgery. In two cases, intraoperative cholangiography was performed, while in four cases, intraoperative fluoroscopic laparoscopic assistance was utilized. The duration of the operations varied from 160 to 360 min, with an average of 281.75 min. The estimated volume of intraoperative bleeding ranged from 50 to 300 mL, with an average of 113.75 mL. The postoperative pathology results revealed that there were two cases of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, six cases of serous cystic neoplasms, one case of mucinous cystic neoplasm, five cases of solid pseudopapillary neoplasms, and two cases of neuroendocrine tumours. The maximum diameter of the tumours ranged from 3.0 to 5.0 cm, with an average of 3.67 cm. There were no instances of postoperative common bile duct stenosis or biliary leakage. Among the cases, five did not exhibit pancreatic fistula, six experienced biochemical leakage, three had grade B pancreatic fistula, and two had grade C pancreatic fistula. Conclusion: Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy, as a method to preserve pancreatic function, entails specific surgical risks and a notable likelihood of postoperative pancreatic fistula, necessitating the expertise of seasoned surgeons for its execution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A stapler is usually used for transection and closure of the pancreas in distal pancreatectomy (DP) or central pancreatectomy (CP). When the pancreas is transected to the right of the portal vein, it is difficult to use a stapler and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) frequently occurs. We report on the efficacy of pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) of the pancreatic stump for patients in whom stapler use is difficult. Methods: Patients who underwent DP or CP were enrolled in this study. The pancreas was usually transected by a stapler, and ultrasonic coagulating shears (UCS) were used depending on the tumor situation. When using UCS, hand-sewn closure or PJ was performed for the pancreatic stump. The relationship between clinicopathological factors and the methods of pancreatic transection and closure were investigated. Results: In total, 164 patients underwent DP or CP, and the pancreas was transected with a stapler in 150 patients and UCS in 14 patients. The rate of CR-POPF was higher and the postoperative hospital stay was longer in the UCS group than in the stapler group. PJ of the pancreatic stump, which was performed for 7 patients, did not worsen intraoperative factors. CR-POPF was not seen in these 7 patients, which was significantly less than that with hand-sewn closure. Conclusions: PJ of the pancreatic stump during DP or CP reduces CR-POPF compared with hand-sewn closure and may be useful especially when the pancreas is transected to the right of the portal vein. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Central pancreatectomy (CP) offers parenchymal preservation compared to conventional distal pancreato-splenectomy for pancreatic neck and body tumours. However, it is associated with more morbidity. This study is aimed at evaluating the peri-operative and long-term functional outcomes, comparing central and distal pancreatectomies (DPs). Methods: Retrospective analysis of patients undergoing pancreatic resections for low-grade malignant or benign tumours in pancreatic neck and body was performed (from January 2007 to December 2022). Preoperative imaging was reviewed for all cases, and only patients with uninvolved pancreatic tail, whereby a CP was feasible, were included. Peri-operative outcomes and long-term functional outcomes were compared between CP and DP. Results: One hundred twenty-two (5.2%) patients, amongst the total of 2304 pancreatic resections, underwent central or distal pancreatectomy for low-grade malignant or benign tumours. CP was feasible in 55 cases, of which 23 (42%) actually underwent CP and the remaining 32 (58%) underwent DP. CP group had a significantly longer operative time [370 min (IQR 300–480) versus 300 min (IQR 240–360); p = 0.002]; however, the major morbidity (43.5% versus 37.5%; p = 0.655) and median hospital stay (10 versus 11 days; p = 0.312) were comparable. The long-term endocrine functional outcome was favourable for the CP group [endocrine insufficiency rate was 13.6% in central versus 42.8% in distal (p = 0.046)]. Conclusion: Central pancreatectomy offers better long-term endocrine function without any increased morbidity in low malignant potential or benign pancreatic tumours of neck and body region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Central pancreatectomy (CP) is accepted as a function‐preserving procedure for benign tumors. However, the indication of CP for pancreatic cancers is limited. This multicenter study aimed to clarify the indications of CP for clinical T1 pancreatic body cancer. Methods: This multicenter study analyzed patients who underwent CP or distal pancreatectomy (DP) for clinical T1 pancreatic body cancer between 2013 and 2020 at three high‐volume centers. Results: A total of 50 patients were enrolled: nine patients, who underwent CP, were classified into the CP group, while 38 patients, who underwent DP, served as controls. Three patients converted CP to DP during operation were excluded. Five patients in the CP group and 15 patients in the control group underwent preoperative treatment. The 5‐year survival rate was 100% in the CP group, and 42% (p =.040) in the control group. Recurrence was found in three patients in the CP group. Importantly, insulin was not required after surgery in patients in the CP group. Conclusion: The clinical outcomes of CP were comparable to or even better than that of conventional pancreatectomy. Our collaborative study suggests that CP may be an acceptable therapeutic option for selected patients with clinical T1 pancreatic body cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Children evaluated for abdominal pain are increasingly recognized to have pancreatic lesions by imaging modalities. Malignant lesions of the pancreas have also been diagnosed at regular intervals, the most common being solid cystic pseudopapillary neoplasm (SPT) -- Borderline (uncertain malignant potential). Surgical resection of this tumor should provide adequate tumor free margins and also should preserve pancreatic tissue. Radical resection of the pancreas will lead to pancreatic insufficiency. Herein, we describe the technique of central pancreatectomy wherein tumor excision gives adequate clearance but preserves the pancreatic tissue, thereby reducing significant morbidity. Materials and Methods: Three children ages ranging between 11 to 12 years diagnosed to have SPT were included in the study. Results: All children underwent successful central pancreatectomy and had an uneventful post operative recovery. Conclusion: Central pancreatectomy offers a good volume of remanant pancreas preserving near normal pancreatic function making it an ideal procedure for select cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Central pancreatectomy (CP) represents an organ-preserving type of pancreatic resection. The procedure has been associated with improved long-term functional results, but increased postoperative morbidity rates, compared with the more radical resection types. The purpose of the present study was to present the outcomes of three consecutive CPs performed in our department.

Aims: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) and laparoscopic central pancreatectomy (LCP) are two surgical methods that can remove pancreatic neck lesions. However, their benefits remain controversial. We aimed to compare the benefits and limitations of LDP and LCP. Methods: In total, 50 patients who underwent LDP (n = 34) or LCP (n =16) between January 2014 and November 2019 were retrospectively reviewed using our database. We analyzed their preoperative characteristics, operative data, pathological features, and postoperative outcomes. Results: The baseline features of patients did not differ significantly between the two groups (P < 0.05). Compared with the LDP group, the LCP group showed significantly prolonged operation time (392 ± 144 vs. 269 ± 130 min, P = 0.007), time to oral intake (3.8 ± 1.3 vs. 2.8 ± 0.9 days, P = 0.017), and hospital stay (19.6 ± 5.1 vs. 15.4 ± 4.1 days, P = 0.008) as well as increased hospital expenses (10.1 ± 6.2 vs. 6.6 ± 1.5 WanRMB, P = 0.023). However, no significant differences were observed in conversion rate (0/16 vs. 0/34), blood loss (154 ± 93 vs. 211 ± 170 mL, P = 0.224), postoperative white blood cell count (10.3 ± 2.7 vs. 11.1 ± 3.1, P = 0.432), first random blood glucose level after operation (8.2 ± 2.1 vs. 8.6 ± 2.6 mmol/L, P = 0.696), and ascites amylase level on day 3 after operation (5212 [3110–14,176] vs. 3142 [604–13,761] U/L, P = 0.167) between the two groups. Moreover, no significant differences were noted in the incidence of postoperative diabetes (1/16 vs. 5/34) between the two groups. However, LCP was associated with significantly higher incidences of pancreatic fistula grades B and C (P = 0.005) and postoperative hemorrhage (P = 0.031). Conclusion: Compared with the LCP, LDP is a useful and safer technique for benign or low-grade malignant tumors in the pancreatic neck. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Non-anatomic pancreatic resections such as enucleation, duodenum-preserving partial pancreatic head resection, central pancreatectomy, and uncinate resection allow for the preservation of more pancreatic parenchyma than standard resections, i.e., Whipple and distal pancreatectomy. These lead to a significantly lesser degree of endocrine and exocrine insufficiency. Robotic approaches are increasingly being adopted for these technically challenging parenchymal-sparing procedures. The aim of our study was to evaluate the use and added value of the robotic approach compared to open approaches and standard anatomic resections. We carried out a systematic review of the available literature surrounding robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomy and found that while postoperative pancreatic fistula remains common, severe complications are exceedingly rare, and rates of endocrine and exocrine insufficiency are negligible after these procedures. Background: Parenchymal-sparing approaches to pancreatectomy are technically challenging procedures but allow for preserving a normal pancreas and decreasing the rate of postoperative pancreatic insufficiency. The robotic platform is increasingly being used for these procedures. We sought to evaluate robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomy and assess its complication profile and efficacy. Methods: This systematic review consisted of all studies on robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomy (central pancreatectomy, duodenum-preserving partial pancreatic head resection, enucleation, and uncinate resection) published between January 2001 and December 2022 in PubMed and Embase. Results: A total of 23 studies were included in this review (n = 788). Robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomy is being performed worldwide for benign or indolent pancreatic lesions. When compared to the open approach, robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomies led to a longer average operative time, shorter length of stay, and higher estimated intraoperative blood loss. Postoperative pancreatic fistula is common, but severe complications requiring intervention are exceedingly rare. Long-term complications such as endocrine and exocrine insufficiency are nearly nonexistent. Conclusions: Robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomy appears to have a higher risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula but is rarely associated with severe or long-term complications. Careful patient selection is required to maximize benefits and minimize morbidity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Central pancreatectomy(CP) is more complex surgery and higher complication rate than distal pancreatectomy(DP). However, with the development of minimally invasive surgery, CP has become a safer surgery technique. In this study, we compare minimally invasive CP(MI-CP) and Minimally invasive spleen-preserving subtotal DP(MI-SpSTDP) to figure out the short-term and long-term outcomes of MI-CP. Methods: From March 2007 to June 2020, 36 cases of MI-SpSTDP and 23 cases of MI-CP were performed for benign and borderline malignant pancreatic tumors in Severance hospital. The occurrence of postoperative pancreatic fistula(POPF) and Clavian-Dindo classification grade 3 or more in the two group was investigated, and the Controlling nutritional status scores(CONUT score) before and 1-year after surgery were compared to determine the long-term outcomes of exocrine function. Results: There was no difference in postoperative complications including POPF between the two groups(17.4% vs 5.1%, p = 0.294). And there were no statistical differences in either the MI-CP group (0.74 ± 0.75 vs. 0.78 ± 0.99, p = 0.803) or the MI-SpSTDP group (0.86 ± 0.83 to 0.61 ± 0.59, p = 0.071). Conclusions: MI-CP had longer operation time and hospital stay and is safe and effective in preserving endocrine and exocrine functions in treatment of benign or borderline tumors located at the neck or proximal body of the pancreas.

Background: The best approach for treating benign or low-grade malignant lesions localized in the pancreatic neck or body remains debatable. Conventional pancreatoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy (DP) are associated with a risk of impairment of pancreatic function at long-term follow-up. With advances in technology and surgical skills, the use of central pancreatectomy (CP) has gradually increased. Objectives: The objective was to compare the safety, feasibility, and short-term and long-term clinical benefits of CP and DP in matched cases. Methods: The PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases were systematically searched to identify studies published from database inception to February 2022 that compared CP and DP. This meta-analysis was performed using R software. Results: Twenty-six studies matched the selection criteria, including 774 CP and 1713 DP cases. CP was significantly associated with longer operative time (P< 0.0001), less blood loss (P<0.01), overall and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (P<0.0001), postoperative hemorrhage (P <0.0001), reoperation (P=0.0196), delayed gastric emptying (P=0.0096), increased hospital stay (P =0.0002), intra-abdominal abscess or effusion (P= 0.0161), higher morbidity (P < 0.0001) and severe morbidity (P < 0.0001) but with a significantly lower incidence of overall endocrine and exocrine insufficiency (P< 0.01), and new-onset and worsening diabetes mellitus (P <0.0001) than DP. Conclusions: CP should be considered as an alternative to DP in selected cases such as without pancreatic disease, length of the residual distal pancreas is more than 5 cm, branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms, and a low risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula after adequate evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Background: The jejunum is primarily used for distal pancreatic stump anastomoses after central pancreatectomy (CP). The study aimed to compare duct-to-mucosa (WJ) and distal pancreatic invagination into jejunum anastomoses (PJ) after CP. (2) Methods: All patients with CP and jejunal anastomoses (between 1 January 2002 and 31 December 2022) were retrospectively assessed and compared. (3) Results: 29 CP were analyzed: WJ—12 patients (41.4%) and PJ—17 patients (58.6%). The operative time was significantly higher in the WJ vs. PJ group of patients (195 min vs. 140 min, p = 0.012). Statistically higher rates of patients within the high-risk fistula group were observed in the PJ vs. WJ group (52.9% vs. 0%, p = 0.003). However, no differences were observed between the groups regarding the overall, severe, and specific postpancreatectomy morbidity rates (p values ≥ 0.170). (4) Conclusions: The WJ and PJ anastomoses after CP were comparable in terms of morbidity rates. However, a PJ anastomosis appeared to fit better for patients with high-risk fistula scores. Thus, a personalized, patient-adapted technique for the distal pancreatic stump anastomosis with the jejunum after CP should be considered. At the same time, future research should explore gastric anastomoses' emerging role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy (LCP) has been implemented in pancreatic surgery; however, open surgery is still the predominant approach for central pancreatectomy (CP). Our objective was to compare LCP with open CP (OCP). Methods: Data were collected from patients with tumours located in the pancreatic neck and proximal body who underwent CP in the Department of Pancreatic Surgery West China Hospital from January 1, 2010, to June 30, 2019. A comparison between the LCP and OCP groups was performed. Results: Fifteen patients underwent CP via the laparoscopic approach, and 96 patients underwent CP via the open approach. Using 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM), 12 patients in the LCP group were matched to 21 in the OCP group. Regarding safety, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) was not significantly different between the two groups (13.3% vs. 12.5%, P = 1.000), even with PSM (16.7% vs. 14.3%, P = 1.000). However, regarding effectiveness, the operative time in the OCP group was significantly shorter than that in the LCP group before (307.0 ± 92.3 ml vs. 220.6 ± 63.6 ml, P < 0.000) and after (300.3 ± 90.2 ml vs. 212.7 ± 44.4 ml, P = 0.002) PSM. Regarding length of stay (LOS), there was no difference between the two groups before (13.1 ± 13.7 days vs. 12.7 ± 10.1 days, P = 0.376) and after PSM (14.4 ± 15.1 days vs. 14.5 ± 16.2 days, P = 0.985). The length of the resected pancreas was shorter in the OCP group than in the LCP group before PSM (50.0 ± 13.2 mm vs. 41.1 ± 11.1 mm, P = 0.043). However, there was no difference between the two groups after PSM (47.9 ± 12.5 mm vs. 37.9 ± 10.4 mm, P = 0.084). Moreover, the other variables showed no difference between the two groups before and after PSM. Conclusion: LCP can demonstrate similar safety and effectiveness to OCP, even in the early stages of the learning curve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Central pancreatectomy(CP) is more complex surgery and higher complication rate than distal pancreatectomy(DP). However, with the development of minimally invasive surgery, CP has become a safer surgery technique. In this study, we compare minimally invasive CP(MI-CP) and Minimally invasive spleen-preserving subtotal DP(MI-SpSTDP) to figure out the short-term and long-term outcomes of MI-CP. From March 2007 to June 2020, 36 cases of MI-SpSTDP and 23 cases of MI-CP were performed for benign and borderline malignant pancreatic tumors in Severance hospital. The occurrence of postoperative pancreatic fistula(POPF) and Clavian-Dindo classification grade 3 or more in the two group was investigated, and the Controlling nutritional status scores(CONUT score) before and 1-year after surgery were compared to determine the long-term outcomes of exocrine function. There was no difference in postoperative complications including POPF between the two groups(17.4% vs 5.1%, p = 0.294). And there were no statistical differences in either the MI-CP group (0.74 ± 0.75 vs. 0.78 ± 0.99, p = 0.803) or the MI-SpSTDP group (0.86 ± 0.83 to 0.61 ± 0.59, p = 0.071). MI-CP had longer operation time and hospital stay and is safe and effective in preserving endocrine and exocrine functions in treatment of benign or borderline tumors located at the neck or proximal body of the pancreas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The use of robotic assistance in minimally invasive pancreatic resection is quickly growing. Methods: We present a systematic review of the literature regarding all types of robotic pancreatic resection (RPR). Our aim is to show for which procedures there is enough experience to permit safe training and provide an estimation of how many centers could serve as teaching institutions. Results: Sixty‐four studies reporting on 4587 RPRs were analyzed. A total of 2598 pancreatoduodenectomies (PD) were reported by 28 centers from Europe (6/28; 21.4%), the Americas (11/28; 39.3%), and Asia (11/28; 39.3%). Six studies reported >100 robot PD (1694/2598; 65.2%). A total of 1618 distal pancreatectomies (DP) were reported by 29 centers from Europe (10/29; 34.5%), the Americas (10/29; 34.5%), and Asia (9/29; 31%). Five studies reported >100 robotic DP (748/1618; 46.2%). A total of 154 central pancreatectomies were reported by six centers from Europe (1/6; 16.7%), the Americas (2/6; 33.3%), and Asia (3/6; 50%). Only 49 total pancreatectomies were reported. Finally, 168 enucleations were reported in seven studies (with a mean of 15.4 cases per study). A single center reported on 60 enucleations (35.7%). Results of each type of robotic procedure are also presented. Conclusions: Experience with RPR is still quite limited. Despite high case volume not being sufficient to warrant optimal training opportunities, it is certainly a key component of every successful training program and is a major criterion for fellowship accreditation. From this review, it appears that only PD and DP can currently be taught at few institutions worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: to compare short-term and long-term postoperative complications between patients who have undergone central pancreatectomy (CP) and distal pancreatectomy (DP).Materials and methods. This retrospective study included patients who had CP for benign pancreatic tumors and tumors of low malignant potential (cases) and patients who had DP for similar reasons (controls). The controls were randomly selected and matched cases for tumor size, presence of diabetes mellitus (Dm), and ASA physical status. we evaluated the incidence of grade ≥III complications (Clavien–Dindo classification), clinically significant pancreatic fistulas, Dm, and impaired exocrine pancreatic function in the late postoperative period.Results. There were 25 cases and 25 controls. Both groups were matched for the main clinical characteristics. Surgeries were significantly longer in the CP groups compared to the DP group (230 min vs 180 min, р < 0.0001). There was no difference in the overall incidence of postoperative complications (9 (36 %) vs 14 (56 %), р = 0.26); there was a trend towards a higher incidence of postoperative complications in the CP group. Two patients after CP (8 %) required repeated surgeries. none of the study participants died. Clinically significant (B and C) pancreatic fistulas were registered in 8 (32 %) and 11 (44 %) patients, respectively (p = 0.56). Two patients in the DP group (8 %) developed impairments of exocrine pancreatic function that required pharmacotherapy. none of the patients developed Dm postoperatively.Conclusion. Despite the fact that CP and DP outcomes were comparable in terms of the main parameters evaluated, severe post-CP complications indicate that there is a need for careful selection of patients for such interventions and further accumulation of experience. Our findings can be used in the subsequent analysis of the experience of different clinics.

Background: There continues to be an interest in minimally invasive approaches to pancreatic surgery. At our institution, there has been a progressive change from an open to minimally invasive surgery (MIS) (laparoscopic, robotic, or laparoscopic-robotic) approach for central pancreatectomies (CP). The aim of this study was to evaluate surgical outcomes with open CP (O-CP) versus minimally invasive CP (MI-CP). Methods: A retrospective medical review of patients who underwent CP between 1993 and 2018 at Yonsei University Health System, Seoul, Korea was performed. Short-term perioperative outcomes were compared between O-CP and MI-CP. Results: Thirty-one CPs (11 open, 20 MIS) were identified during the study period. No difference was observed in admission days between O-CP and MI-CP (21.2 vs. 16.7 days, p = 0.340), although operating time was significantly increased in the MI-CP group (296.8 vs. 374.8 min, p = 0.036). Blood loss was significantly less in MI-CP vs. O-CP (807.1 vs. 214.0 mls, p = 0.001), with no difference in post-operative new-onset diabetes (9% vs. 5%). The overall post-operative pancreatic fistula rate was 25.8%, and no significant difference between O-CP and MI-CP or complication rates (45% vs. 40%) was observed. Conclusion: Despite increased operative time, MI-CP is feasible and comparable to conventional O-CP with regard to surgical outcomes in well-selected patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background In melanoma, completely resectable metastases are surgically resected to expect to prolong relapse-free survival and overall survival. However, distant metastases of melanoma are rarely indicated for surgery because multiple metastases are often observed at diagnosis. We report a case of a man in his 50s who underwent laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy and central pancreatectomy for gastric metastases, lymph node metastases, and pancreatic invasion that could be completely resected. Case presentation A 50-year-old man was diagnosed with malignant melanoma of the left parietal region. After diagnosis, tumor resection and left cervical lymph node dissection were performed, and interferon-β treatment was added as adjuvant therapy. Seventeen months after adjuvant therapy, metastasis of stomach and abdominal lymph nodes from melanoma was diagnosed. And the pancreatic invasion of lymph nodes was suspected. Laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy and the central pancreatectomy were performed because pancreatic invasion of melanoma was intraoperatively found. After 9 months of relapse-free survival, abdominal recurrence was observed. Nivolumab and ipilimumab were administered, and recurrent lesions are currently controlled. The patient has survived more than 3 years since metastasis resection. Conclusion In conclusion, laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy and the central pancreatectomy were performed for gastric and perigastric lymph node metastases and pancreatic invasion due to malignant melanoma, and the negative surgical margin was achieved. Although patient selection is required, the central pancreatectomy was a good indication for maintaining exocrine and endocrine function. The development of immune checkpoint inhibitors and molecular-targeted agents may increase gastrointestinal surgery for metastatic melanoma in the future.

Minimally invasive techniques have been widely applied in general surgery for decades, but the generalization in pancreatic resection underwent a hard process for the complexity of the procedure. The current studies suggested that the safety and feasibility of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS) were approximately equivalent to that of open surgery, but the overall benefit and the oncological outcomes of MIPS remained to be verified. Inferior outcomes were observed in the initial learning curve phase and low-volume hospitals, thus establishing a program that can well assess the learning process and minimize the harm to patients was essential. To ensure safety, the patients should be strictly selected in the early phase of the learning curve, and a careful and judicious stepwise should be considered to broaden the indications.

Incidentalomas, or tumors found incidentally, are very common. However, pancreatic tumors are usually not found as incidentalomas. To date, these tumors represent a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge, since the risks and benefits associated with surgeries that can be performed to remove these tumors must be evaluated due to perioperative complications. It is vitally important to always carry out a correct approach that includes a histopathological study to allow timely identification of tumors that require surgical management or other preoperative treatment, such as chemotherapy or radiotherapy. The majority of these tumors are benign cystic tumors; however, there are cases, like the one presented here, where the tumor turns out to be a solid pseudopapillary tumor (SPT) that requires a different diagnostic and surgical approach. Also, in this case, the importance of evaluating the patient's general health status is highlighted to determine whether or not the required surgery can be performed at that moment or if any prior intervention is required. This case report talks about a patient in whom an incidental pancreatic tumor was found and how its management was carried out from diagnosis to the postoperative period., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2024, Martinez-Esteban et al.)

Robotic central pancreatectomy has been applied for 20 years with the advantage of minimally invasive surgery. The general pancreatic reconstruction approaches include pancreaticojejunostomy and pancreaticogastrostomy. Recently, our group reported a few preliminary cases of application of end-to-end pancreatic anastomosis in robotic central pancreatectomy. This novel approach has not been compared with the conventional approach on a large scale. The objective of this study is to compare end-to-end pancreatic anastomosis with pancreaticojejunostomy after robotic central pancreatectomy based on the perioperative and long-term outcomes. Clinical data consist of demographics, clinicopathologic characteristics, perioperative and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent robotic central pancreatectomy from March 2015 to December 2019 were collected and analyzed. Seventy-four patients received a robotic central pancreatectomy with either end-to-end pancreatic anastomosis (n = 52) or pancreaticojejunostomy (n = 22). End-to-end pancreatic anastomosis was associated with shorter operative time and reduced blood loss. Despite a higher incidence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (69.2% vs. 36.4%, p = 0.009), the newer anastomotic technique was also associated with earlier removal of nasogastric tube and resumption of oral intake. Long-term results, in terms of either endocrine or exocrine function, were not affected by the anastomotic technique. We have shown the feasibility of robotic central pancreatectomy with end-to-end pancreatic anastomosis. Despite streamlined technique, the newer anastomosis appears to improve early post-operative results while preserving endocrine and exocrine functions in the long-term period. Evaluation of the true potential of robotic central pancreatectomy with end-to-end pancreatic anastomosis requires a prospective and randomized study enrolling a large number of patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Pancreatic trauma accounts for only 0.2% of blunt trauma and 1–12% of penetrating injuries. Injuries to other organs, such as spleen, liver, or kidney, are associated with 50.5% of the cases. The isolated complete traumatic transection of the pancreatic neck is rare. In the past, pancreatoduodenectomy or distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy was the standard care for patients with traumatic transection of the pancreatic head, duodenum or distal pancreas, and pancreatic neck. However, limited cases have been reported on the central pancreatectomy for pancreatic neck injuries. We present a rare case of a 21-year-old male patient who received central pancreatectomy for isolated complete traumatic transection of the pancreatic neck. Case presentation A 21-year-old male patient with mild abdominal pain and showed no apparent abnormality in the initial abdominal computed tomography (CT) was brought to the local hospital’s emergency department due to a traffic accident. The patient’s abdominal pain became progressively worse during observation in the hospital that led to the patient being referred to our hospital. The patient’s vital signs were stable, and a physical examination revealed marked tenderness and rebound pain throughout the abdomen. The patient’s white blood cells were increased; The serum amylase and lipase levels were elevated. The abdominal computed tomography revealed pancreatic neck parenchymal discontinuity, peripancreatic effusion, and hemorrhage. The patient underwent exploratory laparotomy. Intraoperative examination identified the neck of the pancreas was completely ruptured, and no apparent abnormalities were observed in the other organs. The patient underwent central pancreatectomy and Roux -Y pancreaticojejunostomy. The patient was treated with antibiotics, acid inhibition and nutritional supports for 10 days after surgery. Symptoms of the patient were significantly relieved, and white blood cells, serum amylase, and lipase levels returned to normal. The patient underwent follow up examination for 6 months with no evidence of exocrine or endocrine insufficiency. Conclusions Central pancreatectomy is an effective pancreas parenchyma preserving procedure, may be a promising alternative to distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy for this complex pancreatic trauma in hemodynamically stable patients. Patient selection and surgeon experience are crucial in the technical aspects of this procedure.

Abstract Background Suturing the proximal pancreatic stump and performing pancreaticoenterostomy for the distal pancreatic stump following central pancreatectomy is a conventional procedure. This reconstruction after resection of the pathological pancreatic lesion brings changes in anatomy and physiology. In this study, an innovative one-stage robotic end-to-end pancreatic anastomosis was reported to replace the conventional pancreaticoenterostomy following central pancreatectomy. Materials and methods The clinical data of 11 consecutive patients who underwent robotic central pancreatectomy with end-to-end pancreatic anastomosis between August 2017 and December 2017 were analyzed retrospectively. Results All operations were completed successfully without any conversion to open surgery. Nine patients had benign tumors, one had a mass-forming chronic pancreatitis, and one had an isolated pancreatic metastasis from a renal cancer. The mean gap left after central pancreatectomy was 4.3 ± 1.0 cm. The median operative time was 121 (range, 105 to 199) min. The median blood loss was 50 (range, 20 to 100) ml. Seven (63.6%) patients developed complications which included Clavien–Dindo Grade I complications in five patients, a Grade II complication in one patient, and a Grade IIIa complication in one patient. Seven patients developed a Grade B postoperative pancreatic fistula, and two patients a biochemical leak. There was no Grade C or worse pancreatic fistula. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at postoperative 6 months showed no stricture in any of the main pancreatic ducts. Three patients had an asymptomatic and small pancreatic pseudocyst. Conclusion Robotic central pancreatectomy with end-to-end pancreatic anastomosis was safe and feasible. It restores the normal anatomy of the pancreas. With its good short-and long-term outcomes, it could be an alternative reconstructive method to pancreaticoenterostomy following central pancreatectomy.

Abstract Background Portal annular pancreas (PAP) is a rare congenital anatomical abnormality of the pancreas in which the portal vein is encircled by aberrant parenchyma, and special attention is needed for pancreatic resections. This is the first report of central pancreatectomy (CP) in a PAP for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Case presentation A 76-year-old man who had a history of left nephrectomy for renal cancer not otherwise specified 36 years earlier and radical cystectomy for bladder cancer 4 years earlier was incidentally found to have a pancreatic tumor and a liver tumor. The pancreatic tumor was diagnosed as metastasis of clear cell RCC, and the liver tumor was diagnosed as moderately differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on preoperative histological evaluation. Preoperative computed tomography imaging showed a type 3A PAP, in which the main pancreatic duct (MPD) ran ventral to the portal vein (anteportal type), and the aberrant parenchyma was located cranial to the confluence of the portal vein and splenic vein (suprasplenic type). After adhesiotomy and partial liver resection, CP was performed. With intraoperative ultrasound guidance, the aberrant parenchyma of the PAP could be preserved, avoiding additional resection. Thus, two pancreatic transections were performed, creating a single-cut margin that contained the MPD in the distal pancreas. Oncologically safe margins were confirmed by intraoperative pathological diagnosis. The distal pancreas was reconstructed by pancreatojejunostomy in the routine procedures. The pathological diagnosis of the surgical specimens was identical to the preoperative diagnosis. A postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) developed from the proximal stump of the head of the pancreas, necessitating no specific treatment other than drainage. The patient showed no signs or symptoms of recurrent RCC or abnormal pancreatic function for 2 years after the operation, although a histologically proven new HCC lesion developed distant from the initial site 8 months after the operation. Conclusions Precise preoperative evaluation of the tumor features and PAP allowed adequate surgical strategies to be planned. Intraoperative ultrasound was useful to minimize parenchymal resections of the PAP. CP is still a challenging procedure in terms of the development of POPF.

Objective. We present a rare pathology with uncommon onset. Background. Mucinous cystic pancreatic neoplasms (MCNs) are rare tumors, which generally occur in the fifth and sixth decades of women. Although some tumours are frankly malignant, all are in fact considered to be potentially malignant. Case report. We present the case of a 30-year-old patient, with a 16/11 cm tumor located in the pancreas body, which was diagnosed 8 months after birth. The preoperative assessment of the pancreatic lesion suggested the diagnosis of mucosal cyst neoplasm, without being able to determine its benign or malignant nature. Central pancreatectomy was performed with a good postoperative evolution. Histopathologic result was represented by mucinous pancreatic chistadenoma. Two years after surgical intervention, the patient presented no signs of recurrence or pancreatic (exocrine or endocrine) secretion deficiency. Conclusions. Preoperative imaging evaluation could be suggestive for mucinous cystic tumour, but this cannot specify however the nature of the tumor. The postpartum occurrence could establish a possible relationship between hormonal levels encountered during pregnancy and the development of this tumor, taking into considerations the ovarian-type stroma and the presence of hormone (estrogen and progesterone) receptors in this neoplasm. Central pancreatectomy without anastomosis preserves the functions of pancreas, and also decreases morbidity.

Background: Central pancreatectomy (CP) has been established as the most common type of parenchyma-sparing pancreatectomy;1 however, CP is associated with higher morbidity and a higher pancreatic fistula (PF) rate than distal pancreatectomy or pancreaticoduodenectomy.2,3 The jejunum patch technique (JPT) for distal pancreatectomy has recently been applied, which efficiently decreases the incidence of PF.4 We have adapted this technique to CP as well as distal pancreatectomy with celiac axis resection.5 Here, we retrospectively evaluated the usefulness of JPT for open CP cases, and report the experience of robot-assisted CP using the JPT. Methods: Among 37 consecutive cases who underwent CP at our institution between 2011 and 2022, clinical characteristics and postoperative short-term outcomes were compared between patients who underwent CP with and without the JPT. In robot-assisted CP using the JPT, after resection of the middle of the pancreas the transected jejunum was elevated through the retrocolic route in a Roux-en-Y fashion. The pancreatic stump was covered by the JPT using a modified Blumgart technique, following pancreaticojejunostomy for the distal side.6 Results: Among the entire cohort, 19 patients underwent CP using the JPT. The clinically relevant PF rate of the JPT group was significantly lower (47.4%) than the no-JPT group (83.3%, p = 0.022), and the length of drainage and hospital stay were shorter in the JPT group (p= 0.010 and p = 0.017, respectively). The blood loss of robot-assisted CP using the JPT was 20 mL, and the JPT took only 15 min. Conclusion: Robot-assisted CP using the JPT is an easy-to-use and promising procedure, based on experience and outcomes from open surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Multivisceral central pancreatectomy for locally advanced tumors of the pancreatic body remains under reported. • Excellent post operative outcome was achieved in our patient after central pancreatectomy with subtotal gastrectomy. • Multivisceral central pancreatectomy is a viable treatment for locally advanced pancreatic neck/body tumors. Central pancreatectomy (CP) is considered a viable alternative to subtotal distal pancreatectomy, for lesions involving the neck or proximal pancreatic body. Multivisceral central pancreatectomy (MVCP) for locally advanced tumors of the pancreatic body remains unreported. We hereby report a case of locally advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (NET) with gastric involvement. The patient underwent successful central pancreatectomy with subtotal gastrectomy for locally advanced NET of the pancreas. In the follow up period, relevant complications like pancreatic insufficiency or pancreatic fistula were not encountered. The patient is doing well more than ten months after resection. A MVCP can be considered in patients with limited pancreatic involvement, as long as sufficient pancreatic parenchyma can be preserved. Additional organ involvement mandating resection should not be considered a contra indication to this procedure. With careful surgical planning and meticulous technique, risk of post operative complications after MVCP can be minimized with added benefit of long term endocrine and exocrine integrity. CP is a viable alternative and can be performed with adjacent organ resection, with acceptable post operative outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a frequent complication after pancreatectomy, leading to increased morbidity and mortality. Optimizing prediction models for POPF has emerged as a critical focus in surgical research. Although over sixty models following pancreaticoduodenectomy, predominantly reliant on a variety of clinical, surgical, and radiological parameters, have been documented, their predictive accuracy remains suboptimal in external validation and across diverse populations. As models after distal pancreatectomy continue to be progressively reported, their external validation is eagerly anticipated. Conversely, POPF prediction after central pancreatectomy is in its nascent stage, warranting urgent need for further development and validation. The potential of machine learning and big data analytics offers promising prospects for enhancing the accuracy of prediction models by incorporating an extensive array of variables and optimizing algorithm performance. Moreover, there is potential for the development of personalized prediction models based on patient- or pancreas-specific factors and postoperative serum or drain fluid biomarkers to improve accuracy in identifying individuals at risk of POPF. In the future, prospective multicenter studies and the integration of novel imaging technologies, such as artificial intelligence-based radiomics, may further refine predictive models. Addressing these issues is anticipated to revolutionize risk stratification, clinical decision-making, and postoperative management in patients undergoing pancreatectomy., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: We declare no conflicts of interest., (©The Author(s) 2024. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: 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., Aim: To summarize and analyze current research results on QOL after pancreatic surgery., Methods: 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., Results: 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., Conclusion: 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., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (©The Author(s) 2024. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective To explore the learning curve of central pancreatectomy (CP) and provide an excellent reference for surgeons to get the point of this operation. Methods Clinical data of 73 patients who underwent CP in the same operation team from January 2006 to January 2018 were collected and retrospectively analyzed by the moving average method (MAM) and the cumulative sum method (CUSUM). Data was analyzed by statistical package for social science (SPSS) software. Results According to the MAM and CUSUM curves, the learning process of CP could be divided into two stages. At the first stage (n =1 -11), the median operation time was 340 minutes and the median intraoperative hemorrhage was 400 ml. In the second stage ( n = 12 -73), the median operation time was 213 minutes and the median intraoperative hemorrhage was 100 ml. The difference was statistically significant (P<0.001).There were no significant differences between the two stages of patients in terms of other aspects (P>0.05). Conclusions CP can be mastered after 11 cases of exercises. In the first 11 operations, surgeons should get familiar with the operation process, respond actively to emergencies and accumulate experience to gain this surgical technique fast. -Subject words - Pancreatic neoplasms; Central pancreatectomy; Learning curve; Complications [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Central pancreatectomy (CP), a partial resection of the pancreas, is indicated for the excision of neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) of the pancreas, when located at the neck or the proximal body. Specifically, CP is preferable in functional NET and in nonfunctional sized 1 to 2 cm or/with proliferation marker Ki67

Objective: 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). Summary Background Data: MIPR has seen rapid development in the past decade. Promising outcomes have been reported by early adopters from highvolume centers. Subsequently, multicenter series as well as randomized controlled trials were reported; however, guidelines for clinical practice were lacking. Methods: 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. Results: 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. Conclusion: 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Central pancreatectomy (CP) is the alternative to distal pancreatectomy (DP) for specific pathologies of the mid-pancreas. However, the benefits of CP over DP remain controversial. This study aims to compare the two procedures by conducting a meta-analysis of all published papers. Methods: A systematic search of original studies comparing CP vs. DP was performed using PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases up to June 2018. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) checklist was followed. Results: Twenty-one studies were included (596 patients with CP and 1070 patients with DP). Compared to DP, CP was associated with significantly higher rates of overall and severe morbidity (p < 0.0001), overall and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (p < 0.0001), postoperative hemorrhage (p = 0.02), but with significantly lower incidences of new-onset (p < 0.0001) and worsening diabetes mellitus (p = 0.004). Furthermore, significantly longer length of hospital stay (p < 0.0001) was observed for CP patients. Conclusions: CP is superior to DP regarding the preservation of pancreatic functions, but at the expense of significantly higher complication rates and longer hospital stay. Proper selection of patients is of utmost importance to maximize the benefits and mitigate the risks of CP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Central pancreatectomy (CP) is accepted as a function-preserving procedure for benign tumors. However, the indication of CP for pancreatic cancers is limited. This multicenter study aimed to clarify the indications of CP for clinical T1 pancreatic body cancer., Methods: This multicenter study analyzed patients who underwent CP or distal pancreatectomy (DP) for clinical T1 pancreatic body cancer between 2013 and 2020 at three high-volume centers., Results: A total of 50 patients were enrolled: nine patients, who underwent CP, were classified into the CP group, while 38 patients, who underwent DP, served as controls. Three patients converted CP to DP during operation were excluded. Five patients in the CP group and 15 patients in the control group underwent preoperative treatment. The 5-year survival rate was 100% in the CP group, and 42% (p = .040) in the control group. Recurrence was found in three patients in the CP group. Importantly, insulin was not required after surgery in patients in the CP group., Conclusion: The clinical outcomes of CP were comparable to or even better than that of conventional pancreatectomy. Our collaborative study suggests that CP may be an acceptable therapeutic option for selected patients with clinical T1 pancreatic body cancer., (© 2023 Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery.)

Summary: Background: Introduced in the mid-1990s, minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS) developed slowly over the next two decades, and its real-life benefits remained unclear. Methods: In this review, the current status and evidence on the most common types of MIPS, such as minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD), distal pancreatectomy, enucleation, and central pancreatectomy are presented. Results: Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is the most frequently used procedure among these, and its indications are nowadays expanding. MIDP for benign and low-grade malignant tumors is advantageous compared to the open approach, suggesting less intraoperative blood loss, shorter hospital stay, faster functional recovery, and better quality of life. The oncological adequacy of MIDP in pancreatic cancer is unclear, as no randomized trials have been published. In contrast, MIPD is a technically challenging procedure performed in a small number of centers and in a selected group of patients. Its use remains controversial, as conflicting data have been reported in the literature. Annual volume and learning curve seem to be the key determinants of safety in MIPD. Minimally invasive pancreatic enucleation and central pancreatectomy are less common. Although one randomized trial was published on minimally invasive vs. open central pancreatectomy, current evidence on these procedures is mostly based on retrospective, single-institution series clearly affected by selection bias and small sample size. Conclusion: Well-designed prospective studies based on national registries are needed to expand knowledge on MIPS and determine its role in pancreatic surgery. To facilitate further development of MIPS, it has to integrate effectively with the outcome-improving effect of a dedicated pancreatic team. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Central pancreatectomy (CP) is a parenchyma-sparing surgery for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors. This study aimed to evaluate the safety of the procedure and to analyze the long-term pancreatic function. The age-specific incidence ratio (IR) was calculated based on the incidence of diabetes mellitus in the general Italian population of Italy. Materials and methods Patients submitted to CP from January 1990 to December 2017 at the Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery of the Pancreas Institute of Verona, Italy, were evaluated. Results The final population was composed of 116 patients. There was a clear prevalence of females (74.1%), the mean age was 48 ± 15 years and the main indication for surgery was a pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (45.7%). A pancreojejunal anastomosis was performed more frequently than a pancreogastric anastomosis (78.4% vs 11.6%). The mean length of stay was 20 ± 33 days. The overall abdominal complications rate was 62%. The frequency of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (grades B and C) was 26.7%. The mortality rate was 0%. The rate of R1-resection was 0.8%, as was the recurrence rate. After a mean follow-up of 12.8 years ±6.5, 6 patients developed new-onset diabetes (NODM, 7.5%), and the IR was 1.36 (95%CI 0.49–2.96). Conclusions CP is associated with high rates of abdominal complications, however, considering the amount of the normal pancreas that was spared, it might be indicated for selected benign or low-malignancy pancreatic tumors. CP patients have the same incidence of diabetes than the general population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Central pancreatectomy (CP) has been applied for treating benign and low-grade malignant tumors in pancreatic neck, but studies regarding CP for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are quite limited. We aimed to investigate the role of central pancreatectomy in the treatment of PDAC in the neck of the pancreas.Methods: Patients who underwent CP at our hospital between 2009 and 2016 were identified. Patients treated by distal pancreatectomy (DP) were matched according to the tumor size, location, and staging. The surgical and survival outcomes were compared between the CP and DP groups.Results: Nine patients had CP. Five (56%) had postoperative complications and three (33%) had clinically significant (grade B + C) fistula. No significant difference was found between the CP and DP groups for the rate of overall morbidity, pancreatic fistula, reoperation, and readmission. Tumor size was smaller in the CP group compared to the DP group. The mortality of both groups was zero. The median postoperative survival was similar between the two groups (20.4 months for CP vs 19.4 months for DP, P = 0.842).Conclusions: CP is safe for patients with small PDAC at the neck of the pancreas. Considering the good preservation of pancreatic endocrine and exocrine functions, CP could be considered as an alternative procedure for single small PDAC in pancreatic neck. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]