Vascular resections in minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma(PDAC)is characterised by poor oncological outcome and is the seventh cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide.With the advances in surgical technology,oncological treatment,and critical care,extended pancreatic resections including vascular resections have become more frequently performed in specialised centres.Furthermore,the boundaries of resectability continue to be pushed in order to achieve a potentially curative approach in selected patients in combination with neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment strategies.This review gives an overview on the current state of venous and arterial resections in PDAC surgery with particular attention given to the minimally invasive approach.

Current status of minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer(PC)is the most lethal cancer among digestive system cancers.Although the only way to radically cure PC is surgical resection,complex surgical procedures and severe post-operative complications lead to high mortality.In recent years,minimally invasive surgery has become more common for PC.Minimally invasive pancreatic resection(MIPR)with the laparoscopic or robotic method has shown its superiority compared with traditional surgery.However,increasing evidence indicates that the long-term or even short-term outcomes of MIPR for PC patients remain controversial.Moreover,the indications and learning curve of MIPR require further assessment.This review aims to discuss the progress in current MIPR,analyze the specific problems and obstacles in the development of MIPR,and try to standardize MIPR procedures and improve the outcomes of MIPR.

Contemporary review of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy

AIM To assess the current literature describing various minimally invasive techniques for and to review short-term outcomes after minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy(PD). METHODS PD remains the only potentially curative treatment for periampullary malignancies, including, most commonly, pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Minimally invasive approaches to this complex operation have begun to be increasingly reported in the literature and are purported by some to reduce the historically high morbidity of PD associated with the open technique. In this systematic review, we have searched the literature for high-quality publications describing minimally invasive techniques for PD-including laparoscopic, robotic, and laparoscopicassisted robotic approaches(hybrid approach). We have identified publications with the largest operative experiences from well-known centers of excellence for this complex procedure. We report primarily short term operative and perioperative results and some short term oncologic endpoints. RESULTS Minimal y invasive techniques include laparoscopic, robotic and hybrid approaches and each of these techniques has strong advocates. Consistently, across all minimally invasive modalities, these techniques are associated less intraoperative blood loss than traditional open PD(OPD), but in exchange for longer operating times. These techniques are relatively equivalent in terms of perioperative morbidity and short term oncologic outcomes. Importantly, pancreatic fistula rate appears to be comparable in most minimally invasive series compared to open technique. Impact of minimally invasive technique on length of stay is mixed compared to some traditional open series. A few series have suggestedthat initiation of and time to adjuvant therapy may be improved with minimally invasive techniques, however this assertion remains controversial. In terms of shortterms costs, minimally invasive PD is significantly higher than that of OPD. CONCLUSION Minimally invasive approaches to PD show great promise as a strategy to improve short-term outcomes in patients undergoing PD, but the best results remain isolated to high-volume centers of excellence.

Minimally invasive vs open pancreatectomy for nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

BACKGROUND The mainstay of treating nonfunctioning-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors(NFPNETs)is surgical resection.However,minimally invasive approaches to pancreatic resection for treating NF-PNETs are not widely accepted,and the longterm oncological outcomes of such approaches remain unknown.AIM To determine the short-and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive pancreatic resection conducted in patients with NF-PNETs.METHODS Prospective databases from Severance Hospital were searched for 110 patients who underwent curative resection for NF-PNETs between January 2003 and August 2018.RESULTS The proportion of minimally invasive surgery(MIS)procedures performed for NF-PNET increased to more than 75%after 2013.There was no significant difference in post-operative complications(P=0.654),including pancreatic fistula(P=0.890)and delayed gastric emptying(P=0.652),between MIS and open approaches.No statistically significant difference was found in disease-free survival between the open approach group and the MIS group(median follow-up period,28.1 mo;P=0.428).In addition,the surgical approach(MIS vs open)was not found to be an independent prognostic factor in treating NF-PNET patients[Exp(β)=1.062;P=0.929].CONCLUSION Regardless of the type of surgery,a minimally invasive approach can be safe and feasible for select NF-PNET patients.

Invasive intervention timing for infected necrotizing pancreatitis: Late invasive intervention is not late for collection

With the advance of invasive interventions,the treatment model for infected necrotizing pancreatitis(INP)has shifted from open surgery to the step-up minimally invasive treatment.Late intervention,originating from the open surgery era,has been questioned in the minimally invasive period.With the emergence of new high-quality evidence about the timing for intervention,it seems to be increasingly apparent that,even in the age of minimal invasiveness,“late intervention”waiting for the necrotic collections to be encapsulated is still necessary.This opinion review mainly discusses the intervention timing for INP.

Robotic surgery of the pancreas

Pancreatic surgery is one of the most challenging and complex fields in general surgery.While minimally invasive surgery has become the standard of care for many intra-abdominal pathologies the overwhelming majority of pancreatic surgery is performed in an open fashion.This is attributed to the retroperitoneal location of the pancreas,its intimate relationship to major vasculature and the complexity of reconstruction in the case of pancreatoduodenectomy.Herein,we describe the application of robotic technology to minimally invasive pancreatic surgery.The unique capabilities of the robotic platform have made the minimally invasive approach feasible and safe with equivalent if not better outcomes(e.g.,decreased length of stay,less surgical site infections)to conventional open surgery.However,it is unclear whether the robotic approach is truly superior to traditional laparoscopy;this is a key point given the substantial costs associated with procuring and maintaining robotic capabilities.

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A propensity score-matched analysis

Background: Minimally invasive surgery is becoming increasingly popular in the field of pancreatic surgery. However, there are few studies of robotic distal pancreatectomy(RDP) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma(PDAC). This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and feasibility of RDP for PDAC. Methods: Patients who underwent RDP or laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy(LDP) for PDAC between January 2015 and September 2020 were reviewed. Propensity score matching analyses were performed. Results: Of the 335 patients included in the study, 24 underwent RDP and 311 underwent LDP. A total of 21 RDP patients were matched 1:1 with LDP patients. RDP was associated with longer operative time(209.7 vs. 163.2 min;P = 0.003), lower open conversion rate(0% vs. 4.8%;P < 0.001), higher cost(15 722 vs. 12 699 dollars;P = 0.003), and a higher rate of achievement of an R0 resection margin(90.5% vs. 61.9%;P = 0.042). However, postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B or C showed no significant intergroup difference(9.5% vs. 9.5%). The median disease-free survival(34.5 vs. 17.3 months;P = 0.588) and overall survival(37.7 vs. 21.9 months;P = 0.171) were comparable between the groups. Conclusions: RDP is associated with longer operative time, a higher cost of surgery, and a higher likelihood of achieving R0 margins than LDP.

Role of robotic-assisted pancreatic surgery:lessons learned from our initial experience

BACKGROUND:Minimally invasive surgery has achieved worldwide acceptance in various fields, however, pancreatic surgery remains one of the most challenging abdominal procedures. In fact, the indication for robotic surgery in pancreatic disease has been controversial. The present study aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of robotic pancreatic resection.METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed our experience of robotic pancreatic resection done in Sanchinarro University Hospital. Clinicopathologic characteristics, and perioperative and postoperative outcomes were recorded and analyzed.RESULTS:From October 2010 to April 2016, 50 patients underwent robotic-assisted surgery for different pancreatic pathologies. All procedures were performed using the da Vinci robotic system. Of the 50 patients, 26 were male and 24 female. The average age of all patients was 62 years. Operative time was 370 minutes. Among the procedures performed were 16 pancreaticoduodenectomies(PD), 23 distal pancreatectomies(DP), 11 tumor enucleations(TE). The mean hospital stay was 17.6 days in PD group, 9.0 days in DP group and 8.4 days in TE group. Pancreatic fistula occurred in 10 cases(20%), 2 after PD, 3 after DP, and 5 after TE. Four patients had postoperative transfusion in PD group and one in DP group. Conversion to open laparotomy occurred in four patients(8%). No serious intraoperative complications were observed. CONCLUSIONS:From our early experience, robotic pancreatic surgery is a safe and feasible procedure. Further experience and follow-up are required to confirm the role of robotic approach in pancreatic surgery.

Robot-assisted trans-gastric drainage and debridement of walled-off pancreatic necrosis using the EndoWrist stapler for the da Vinci Xi:A case report

BACKGROUND Walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) is a late complication of acute pancreatitis. The management of a WOPN depends on its location and on patient's symptoms. Trans-gastric drainage and debridement of WOPN represents an important surgical treatment option for selected patients. The da Vinci surgical System has been developed to allow an easy, minimally invasive and fast surgery, also in challenging abdominal procedures. We present here a case of a WOPN treated with a robotic trans-gastric drainage using the da Vinci Xi. CASE SUMMARY A 63-year-old man with an episode of acute necrotizing pancreatitis was referred to our center. Six wk after the acute episode the patient developed a walled massive fluid collection, with an extensive pancreatic necrosis, causing obstruction of the gastrointestinal tract. The patient underwent a robotic transgastric drainage and debridement of the WOPN performed with the da Vinci Xi platform. Firstly, an anterior ideal gastrotomy was carried out, guided by intraoperative ultrasound (US)-scan using the TilePro? function. Then, through the gastrotomy, the best location for drainage on the posterior gastric wall was again US-guided identified. The anastomosis between the posterior gastric wall and the walled-off necrosis wall was carried out with the new EndoWrist stapler with vascular cartridge. Debridement and washing of the cavity through the anastomosis were performed. Finally, the anterior gastrotomy was closed and the cholecystectomy was performed. The postoperative course was uneventful and a post-operative computed tomography-scan showed the collapse of the fluid collection. CONCLUSION In selected cases of WOPN the da Vinci Surgical System can be safely used as a valid surgical treatment option.

“Parenchyma transection-first”strategy is superior to“tunnel-first”strategy in robotic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with conservation of splenic vessels

Background: Creating a tunnel between the pancreas and splenic vessels followed by pancreatic parenchyma transection(“tunnel-first” strategy) has long been used in spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy(SPDP) with splenic vessel preservation(Kimura’s procedure). However, the operation space is limited in the tunnel, leading to the risks of bleeding and difficulties in suturing. We adopted the pancreatic “parenchyma transection-first” strategy to optimize Kimura’s procedure. Methods: The clinical data of consecutive patients who underwent robotic SPDP with Kimura’s procedure between January 2017 and September 2022 at our center were retrieved. The cohort was classified into a “parenchyma transection-first” strategy(P-F) group and a “tunnel-first” strategy(T-F) group and analyzed. Results: A total of 91 patients were enrolled in this cohort, with 49 in the T-F group and 42 in the P-F group. Compared with the T-F group, the P-F group had significantly shorter operative time(146.1 ± 39.2 min vs. 174.9 ± 46.6 min, P < 0.01) and lower estimated blood loss [40.0(20.0–55.0) m L vs. 50.0(20.0–100.0) m L, P = 0.03]. Failure of splenic vessel preservation occurred in 10.2% patients in the TF group and 2.4% in the P-F group( P = 0.14). The grade 3/4 complications were similar between the two groups( P = 0.57). No differences in postoperative pancreatic fistula, abdominal infection or hemorrhage were observed between the two groups. Conclusions: The pancreatic “parenchyma transection-first” strategy is safe and feasible compared with traditional “tunnel-first strategy” in SPDP with Kimura’s procedure.

Surgical management of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms

Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms are a rare and complex group of neoplastic lesions that develop from pancreatic islet cells.Their incidence has dramatically increased during the last two decades.Due to its complex nature and pathophysiological behaviour,surgical management continues to evolve.Surgery remains the cornerstone of treatment for most non-functional and functional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours,while lymphadenectomy remains a controversial subject.Different techniques,such as pancreas-preserving and minimally invasive approaches,continue to evolve and offer the same overall outcomes as open surgery.This comprehensive review describes in detail the current and most up-todate classification and staging of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours,explores the rationale for nonsurgical and surgical management,and focuses on surgical treatment and more specifically,on minimally invasive approaches.

早期颅内血肿微创清除术治疗轻中度基底核区高血压脑出血的临床效果分析

目的分析早期颅内血肿微创清除术应用在轻中度基底核区高血压脑出血(HICH)中的临床效果。方法80例轻中度的基底核区HICH患者,依据随机数字表法划分为研究组和对照组,每组40例。对照组采取保守方式治疗,研究组实施早期颅内血肿微创清除术治疗。对比两组治疗效果、神经功能评分、认知功能评分及并发症发生情况。结果研究组总有效率为95.00%,与对照组77.50%相比更优,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。治疗前,两组神经功能评分对比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);治疗后,研究组神经功能评分(13.64±2.12)分比对照组的(19.74±5.26)分低,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。研究组注意评分(5.71±0.43)分、命名评分(2.76±0.24)分、语言流畅评分(1.99±0.37)分、定向力评分(5.97±0.45)分、延迟记忆评分(2.96±0.33)分、抽象思维评分(1.65±0.33)分、视空间的执行能力评分(4.79±0.53)分、总分(23.85±5.47)分与对照组的(4.12±0.49)、(2.04±0.03)、(1.52±0.08)、(4.06±0.32)、(1.76±0.14)、(1.14±0.21)、(4.02±0.46)、(17.28±2.35)分相比更高,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。研究组并发症发生率7.50%与对照组25.00%相比较低,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论早期颅内血肿微创清除术应用在轻中度的基底核区HICH患者效果较好,可帮助患者更好地恢复其神经功能,帮助患者提升认知功能,降低术后并发症,能有效促进其早日康复,临床上值得推广使用。

Pancreatic necrosis:Complications and changing trend of treatment

Incidence of acute pancreatitis seems to be increasing in the Western countries and has been associated with significantly increased morbidity. Nearly 80% of the patients with acute pancreatitis undergo resolution; some develop complications including pancreatic necrosis. Infection of pancreatic necrosis is the leading cause of death in these patients. A significant portion of these patients needs surgical interventions. Traditionally, the "gold standard" procedure has been the open surgical necrosectomy, which is now being completed by the relatively lesser invasive interventions. Minimally invasive surgical(MIS) procedures include endoscopic drainage, percutaneous image-guided catheter drainage, and retroperitoneal drainage. This review article discusses the open and MIS interventions for pancreatic necrosis with each having its own respective benefits and disadvantages are covered.

老年胰腺癌早期诊断及微创外科治疗的研究进展

近年来,胰腺癌的发病率逐渐升高,老年胰腺癌的比重也逐渐上升,因此在临床诊疗工作中,需给予老年胰腺癌诊疗工作更多重视。然而临床实践发现老年胰腺癌诊治工作还存在不足,最为明显的是早期诊断率低,因而患者接受根治术的比例较低,导致临床疗效及预后较差。当前关于胰腺癌的诊断已有多种可行方法,微创外科治疗是胰腺癌临床治疗的重要选择。本文具体论述老年胰腺癌早期诊断及微创外科治疗现状,以期为老年胰腺癌诊疗工作提供一定指导。

机器人手术在肝胆胰外科中的应用与进展

机器人手术自21世纪问世以来已成为微创手术的代表,并得到迅速发展。肝胆胰手术难度大,往往涉及复杂的解剖、消化道重建及精细的血管吻合,这导致其微创手术的发展相对缓慢,而机器人手术则可打破这一局面。如何拓宽机器人手术的适应证并进一步发展机器人手术技术则是未来外科发展的重要方向。本综述针对机器人手术在肝胆胰外科中的应用现状及未来发展前景进行总结及展望。

感染坏死性胰腺炎外科治疗现状和展望

急性胰腺炎是指因胰酶异常激活对胰腺自身及周围器官产生消化作用而引起的急腹症。急性胰腺炎发病率较高,并呈逐年上升趋势。感染坏死性胰腺炎(INP)是急性胰腺炎最严重的并发症,病死率高,其外科介入主要包括经皮穿刺引流术、微创手术、内镜治疗和开放手术等。本文综述了目前INP外科治疗的现状,并对其未来的治疗方向进行了展望,以期为临床INP治疗方法的选择提供理论依据。

机器人外科手术系统辅助下治疗胰腺疾病的临床疗效

目的探讨达芬奇S机器人外科手术系统辅助胰腺手术的可行性、手术难点以及手术适应证。方法回顾性分析上海交通大学医学院附属瑞金医院2010年3—9月在达芬奇S机器人外科手术系统辅助下完成的20例胰腺切除术患者的临床资料,其中胰腺中段切除术5例,胰体尾切除术4例,Beger's术3例,胰十二指肠切除术8例。观察患者术中、术后恢复以及术后并发症的情况。结果 20例患者均成功完成手术,手术时间为40～510min,中位手术时间为306min;术中出血量为50～1100mL,中位出血量为385mL。术后并发症发生率为30%(6/20),其中胰瘘发生率为25%(5/20)。术后随访1～6个月,所有患者均恢复良好,未发现肿瘤复发转移,无1例死亡。结论达芬奇S机器人外科手术系统辅助胰腺手术安全可行,并能降低胰腺微创手术的难度,具有微创的优势。

微创技术与传统开腹手术治疗重症急性胰腺炎临床疗效比较

目的比较微创技术与传统开腹手术治疗重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)的临床效果。方法回顾性分析2005年6月至2010年8月采用手术治疗的SAP患者56例,其中微创手术组32例,开腹手术组24例。微创手术组根据病情的不同分别采用B型超声引导下经皮穿刺置管引流术及腹腔镜或肾镜下坏死组织清除并置管引流术。开腹手术组选择合适治疗时机,直接开腹行坏死组织清除并置管引流术。结果微创手术组治疗后效果良好,手术后消化道瘘发生率(3.1%比25.0%,P<0.05)和脏器功能障碍发生率(12.5%比37.5%,P<0.05)均低于开腹手术组,平均住院时间[(35±14)d比(45±17)d,P<0.05]和住院费用[(185 970±58 530)元比(241 940±68370)元,P<0.05]也低于开腹手术组。结论微创技术能有效降低手术后的消化道瘘发生率和脏器功能障碍发生率,并且平均住院时间和住院费用也明显下降。

重症急性胰腺炎合并消化道瘘16例

目的:探讨重症急性胰腺炎(severe acute pancreatitis,SAP)合并消化道瘘的危险因素、临床诊治经验,其目的提高SAP治愈率,降低消化道瘘的发生率及病死率.方法:对2006-01/2011-08我科收治的16例SAP合并消化道瘘的临床资料进行回顾性研究,分析其发生的高危因素、发生部位、时间及对机体的影响,并对其临床诊断和治疗进行总结.结果:本组16例中结肠瘘6例,占37.5%(6/16),十二指肠瘘5例,占31.25%(5/16),胃瘘3例,占18.75(3/16),十二指肠瘘+结肠瘘1例,占6.25(1/16),十二指肠瘘+小肠瘘1例,占6.25(1/16);消化道瘘发生的时间多在SAP术后3-9wk内,16例均有胰外侵犯(胰腺假性囊肿1例,假性囊肿合并感染出血4例,胰周脓肿5例,合并胰腺坏死2例,细菌合并真菌感染3例),16例均经引流管造影确诊;早期手术2例(<2wk),晚期手术14例(>2wk);术中均放置引流管(2-11不等)且术后行冲洗引流,放置时间均>2wk;15例术中预防性行胃空肠造瘘并早期恢复肠内营养.本组治愈14例,治愈率为87.5%(14/16),因十二指肠瘘合并腹腔大出血自行放弃治疗1例,因结肠瘘合并全身感染并多发脏器功能衰竭而死亡1例.结论:SAP合并消化道瘘与胰液腐蚀、感染、手术时机及方式、引流管数量、位置、放置时间、早期恢复肠内营养等相关;经引流管及窦道造影检查是诊断消化道瘘的一种简便可靠的方法;防治的重点在于有效选择手术方式如微创并建立充分有效的引流,同时早期建立肠内营养支持治疗并积极控制感染.

微创手术与开腹手术治疗重症胰腺炎的围术期应激反应及术后炎性反应

目的:比较微创与开腹手术治疗重症胰腺炎疗效。方法:选择我院2011年6月至2015年6月收治73例重症胰腺炎患者,分为A组(n=37)与B组(n=36),A组行微创手术,B组开腹手术,比较两组围手术期应激反应、术后炎性反应、并发症发生率与病死率。结果:A组围手术期(0+Ⅰ)级疼痛患者占70.3%,高于B组44.4%(P<0.05)。手术72 h后A组CRP、TNF-α、IL-6低于术前及B组,APN高于术前及B组(均P<0.05)。A组肺部感染发生率27.0%、病死率5.4%,低于B组50.0%、22.2%(均P<0.05)。结论:微创手术治疗重症胰腺炎创伤轻,术后疼痛轻、并发症少,病死率低。