PMO-099 A comparative study of laparoscopic vs open distal pancreatectomy

Introduction The laparoscopic approach to distal pancreatectomy for benign and malignant diseases appears to offer advantages and is replacing open surgery in some centres. However, well-designed studies comparing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) are limited. We present a single-institution study comparing the outcomes of LDP to ODP. Methods The demographic details, clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients who underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy were compared to those who had the surgery performed by open technique. The two approaches were compared on an intention-to-treat basis. Data shown represent medians. Results Between 2002 and 2009, 32 patients (20 female) underwent 16 LDP and 16 ODP respectively. The laparoscopic and open groups were comparable for age (57 vs 63 years, p = 0.584), sex distribution and tumour size (3.9 vs 4 cm, p=0.939). Both groups had a comparable number of malignant cases (56% vs 50%, p=1.0). Although LDP took longer to complete (287.5 vs 240 min, p=0.061), it was associated with significantly lower blood loss (300 vs 500 ml, p=0.031) but comparable perioperative transfusion rate (p=0.471). The laparoscopic approach was associated with a significantly higher spleen-preservation rate (overall: 50% vs 12.5%, p=0.05; benign pathology: 85.7% vs 25%, p=1.0). LDP patients had a significantly lower HDU stay (1 vs 4.5 days, p Conclusion The laparoscopic approach to distal pancreatectomy results in significantly lower blood loss, and shorter HDU and hospital stay compared with open surgery. The postoperative morbidity and R0 resection margin rates were comparably similar. Competing interests None declared.