Optimizing prediction models for pancreatic fistula after pancreatectomy:Current status and future perspectives

Postoperative pancreatic fistula(POPF)is a frequent complication after pancre-atectomy,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 pro-gressively 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 pancre-atectomy.

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving total pancreatectomy for the treatment of low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors:Two case reports and review of literature

BACKGROUND Function-preserving pancreatectomy can improve the long-term quality of life of patients with benign or low-grade malignant tumors,such as intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms(IPMNs)and mucinous cystic neoplasms.However,there is limited literature on laparoscopic spleen-preserving total pancreatectomy(LSpTP)due to technical difficulties.CASE SUMMARY Patient 1 was a 51-year-old male diagnosed with IPMN based on preoperative imaging,showing solid nodules in the pancreatic head and diffuse dilation of the main pancreatic duct with atrophy of the distal pancreas.We performed L-SpTP with preservation of the splenic vessels,and the postoperative pathology report revealed IPMN with invasive carcinoma.Patient 2 was a 60-year-old male with multiple cystic lesions in the pancreatic head and body.L-SpTP was performed,and intraoperatively,the splenic vein was injured and required ligation.Postoperative pathology revealed a mucinous cystic tumor of the pancreas with low-grade dysplasia.Both patients were discharged on postoperative day 7,and there were no major complications during the perioperative period.CONCLUSION We believe that L-SpTP is a safe and feasible treatment for low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors,but more case studies are needed to evaluate its safety,efficacy,and long-term outcomes.

Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy with gastro-pancreatic anastomosis for symptomatic serous cystadenoma:A case report and literature review

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.

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.

Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy from multi-port to reducedport surgery approach

BACKGROUND Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery via the multi-port approach has become a primary surgical method for distal pancreatectomy(DP)due to its advantages of lower wound pain and superior cosmetic results.Some studies have applied reduced-port techniques for DP in an attempt to enhance cosmetic outcomes due to the minimally invasive effects.Numerous recent review studies have compared multi-port laparoscopic DP(LDP)and multi-port robotic DP(RDP);most of these studies concluded multi-port RDP is more beneficial than multi-port LDP for spleen preservation.However,there have been no comprehensive reviews of the value of reduced-port LDP and reduced-port RDP.AIM To search for and review the studies on spleen preservation and the clinical outcomes of minimally invasive DP that compared reduced-port DP surgery with multi-port DP surgery.METHODS The PubMed medical database was searched for articles published between 2013 and 2022.The search terms were implemented using the following Boolean search algorithm:(“distal pancreatectomy”OR“left pancreatectomy”OR“peripheral pancreatic resection”)AND(“reduced-port”OR“single-site”OR“single-port”OR“dual-incision”OR“single-incision”)AND(“spleen-preserving”OR“spleen preservation”OR“splenic preservation”).A literature review was conducted to identify studies that compared the perioperative outcomes of reduced-port LDP and reduced-port RDP.RESULTS Fifteen articles published in the period from 2013 to 2022 were retrieved using three groups of search terms.Two studies were added after manually searching the related papers.Finally,10 papers were selected after removing case reports(n=3),non-English language papers(n=1),technique papers(n=1),reviews(n=1),and animal studies(n=1).The common items were defined as items reported in more than five papers,and data on these common items were extracted from all papers.The ten studies included a total of 337 patients(females/males:231/106)who underwent DP.In total,166 patients(females/males,106/60)received multi-port LDP,126(females/males,90/36)received reduced-port LDP,and 45(females/males,35/10)received reduced-port RDP.CONCLUSION Reduced-port RDP leads to a lower intraoperative blood loss,a lower postoperative pancreatic fistula rate,and shorter hospital stay and follow-up duration,but has a lower spleen preservation rate.

Outcomes of total pancreatectomy with islet autotransplantation:A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Despite the increased use of total pancreatectomy with islet autotransplantation(TPIAT),systematic evidence of its outcomes remains limited.AIM To evaluate the outcomes of TPIAT.METHODS We searched PubMed,EMBASE,and Cochrane databases from inception through March 2019 for studies on TPIAT outcomes.Data were extracted and analyzed using comprehensive meta-analysis software.The random-effects model was used for all variables.Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 measure and Cochrane Q-statistic.Publication bias was assessed using Egger’s test.RESULTS Twenty-one studies published between 1980 and 2017 examining 1011 patients were included.Eighteen studies were of adults,while three studied pediatric populations.Narcotic independence was achieved in 53.5%[95% Confidence Interval(CI):45-62,P<0.05,I2=81%]of adults compared to 51.9%(95%CI:17-85,P<0.05,I2=84%)of children.Insulinindependence post-procedure was achieved in 31.8%(95%CI:26-38,P<0.05,I2=64%)of adults with considerable heterogeneity compared to 47.7%(95%CI:20-77,P<0.05,I2=82%)in children.Glycated hemoglobin(HbA1C)12 mo post-surgery was reported in four studies with a pooled value of 6.76%(P=0.27).Neither stratification by age of the studied population nor metaregression analysis considering both the study publication date and the islet-cell-equivalent/kg weight explained the marked heterogeneity between studies.CONCLUSION These results indicate acceptable success for TPIAT.Future studies should evaluate the discussed measures before and after surgery for comparison.

Distal pancreatectomy with or without radical approach, vascular resections and splenectomy: Easier does not always mean easy

Because distal pancreatectomy(DP)has no reconstructive steps and less frequent vascular involvement,it is thought to be the easier counterpart of pancreaticoduodenectomy.This procedure has a high surgical risk and the overall incidences of perioperative morbidity(mainly pancreatic fistula),and mortality are still high,in addition to the challenges that accompany delayed access to adjuvant therapies(if any)and prolonged impairment of daily activities.Moreover,surgery to remove malignancy of the body or tail of the pancreas is associated with poor long-term oncological outcomes.From this perspective,new surgical approaches,and aggressive techniques,such as radical antegrade modular pancreato-splenectomy and DP with celiac axis resection,could lead to improved survival in those affected by more locally advanced tumors.Conversely,minimally invasive approaches such as laparoscopic and robotic surgeries and the avoidance of routine concomitant splenectomy have been developed to reduce the burden of surgical stress.The purpose of ongoing surgical research has been to achieve significant reductions in perioperative complications,length of hospital stays and the time between surgery and the beginning of adjuvant chemotherapy.Because a dedicated multidisciplinary team is crucial to pancreatic surgery,hospital and surgeon volumes have been confirmed to be associated with better outcomes in patients affected by benign,borderline,and malignant diseases of the pancreas.The purpose of this review is to examine the state of the art in distal pancreatectomies,with a special focus on minimally invasive approaches and oncological-directed techniques.The widespread reproducibility,cost-effectiveness and long-term results of each oncological procedure are also taken into deep consideration.

Minimally invasive radical pancreatectomy for left-sided pancreatic cancer:Current status and future perspectives

Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy has been regarded as a safe and effective treatment for benign and borderline malignant pancreatic lesions.However,its application for left-sided pancreatic cancer is still being debated.The clinical evidence for radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy(RAMPS)-based minimally invasive approaches for leftsided pancreatic cancer was reviewed.Potential indications and surgical concepts for minimally invasive RAMPS were suggested.Despite the limited clinical evidence for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy in left-sided pancreatic cancer,the currently available clinical evidence supports the use of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy under oncologic principles in wellselected left sided pancreatic cancers.A pancreasconfined tumor with an intact fascia layer between the pancreas and left adrenal gland/kidney positioned more than 1 or 2 cm away from the celiac axis is thought to constitute a good condition for the use of margin-negative minimally invasive RAMPS.The use of minimally invasive(laparoscopic or robotic)anterior RAMPS is feasible and safe for margin-negative resection in wellselected left-sided pancreatic cancer.The oncologic feasibility of the procedure remains to be determined;however,the currently available interim results indicate that even oncologic outcomes will not be inferior to those of open radical distal pancreatosplenectomy.

Central pancreatectomy: The Dagradi Serio Iacono operation. Evolution of a surgical technique from the pioneers to the robotic approach

Central pancreatectomy(CP) is a parenchyma-sparing surgical procedure. The aims are to clarify the history and the development of CP and to give credits to those from whom it came. Ehrhardt, in 1908, described segmental neck resection(SNR) followed, in 1910, by Finney without reconstructive part. In 1950 Honjyo described two cases of SNR combined with gastrectomy for gastric cancer infiltrating the neck of the pancreas. Guillemin and Bessot(1957) and Letton and Wilson(1959) dealt only with the reconstructive aspect of CP. Dagradi and Serio, in 1982, performed the first CP including the resective and reconstructive aspects. Subsequently Iacono has validated it with functional endocrine and exocrine tests and popularized it worldwide. In 2003, Baca and Bokan performed laparoscopic CP and, In 2004, Giulianotti et al performed a robotic assisted CP. CP is performed worldwide either by open surgery or by using minimally-invasive or robotic approaches. This confirms that the operation does not belong to whom introduced it but to everyone who carries out it; however credit must be given to those from whom it came.

Laparoscopic pancreatectomy: Indications and outcomes

The application of minimally invasive approaches to pancreatic resection for benign and malignant diseases has been growing in the last two decades. Studies have demonstrated that laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is feasible and safe, and many of them show that compared to open distal pancreatectomy, LDP has decreased blood loss and length of hospital stay, and equivalent post-operative complication rates and short-term oncologic outcomes. LDP is becoming the procedure of choice for benign or small low-grade malignant lesions in the distal pancreas. Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) has not yet been widely adopted. There is no clear evidence in favor of MIPD over open pancreaticoduodenectomy in operative time, blood loss, length of stay or rate of complications. Robotic surgery has recently been applied to pancreatectomy, and many of the advantages of laparoscopy over open surgery have been observed in robotic surgery. Laparoscopic enucleation is considered safe for patients with small, benign or low-grade malignant lesions of the pancreas that is amenable to parenchyma-preserving procedure. As surgeons&#x02019; experience with advanced laparoscopic and robotic skills has been growing around the world, new innovations and breakthrough in minimally invasive pancreatic procedures will evolve.

Partial pancreatic tail preserving subtotal pancreatectomy forpancreatic cancer: Improving glycemic control and quality of lifewithout compromising oncological outcomes

BACKGROUND Total pancreatectomy (TP) is usually considered a therapeutic option forpancreatic cancer in which Whipple surgery and distal pancreatectomy areundesirable, but brittle diabetes and poor quality of life (QoL) remain majorconcerns. A subset of patients who underwent TP even died due to severehypoglycemia. For pancreatic cancer involving the pancreatic head and proximalbody but without invasion to the pancreatic tail, we performed partial pancreatictail preserving subtotal pancreatectomy (PPTP-SP) in selected patients, in order toimprove postoperative glycemic control and QoL without compromisingoncological outcomes.AIM To evaluate the efficacy of PPTP-SP for patients with pancreatic cancer.METHODS We retrospectively reviewed 56 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomawho underwent PPTP-SP (n = 18) or TP (n = 38) at our institution from May 2014to January 2019. Clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups, withan emphasis on oncological outcomes, postoperative glycemic control, and QoL.QoL was evaluated using the European Organization for Research and Treatmentof Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC PAN26).All patients were followed until May 2019 or until death.RESULTS A total of 56 consecutive patients were enrolled in this study. Perioperativeoutcomes, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival were comparablebetween the two groups. No patients in the PPTP-SP group developed cancerrecurrence in the pancreatic tail stump or splenic hilum, or a clinical pancreaticfistula. Patients who underwent PPTP-SP had significantly better glycemiccontrol, based on their higher rate of insulin-independence (P = 0.014), lowerhemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level (P = 0.046), lower daily insulin dosage (P < 0.001),and less frequent hypoglycemic episodes (P < 0.001). Global health was similar inthe two groups, but patients who underwent PPTP-SP had better functional status(P = 0.036), milder symptoms (P = 0.013), less severe diet restriction (P = 0.011),and higher confidence regarding future life (P = 0.035).CONCLUSION For pancreatic cancer involving the pancreatic head and proximal body, PPTP-SPachieves perioperative and oncological outcomes comparable to TP in selectedpatients while significantly improving long-term glycemic control and QoL.

Central pancreatectomy for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors in the neck and body of the pancreas

BACKGROUND For tumors in the neck and body of the pancreas,distal pancreatectomy(DP)has been the standard surgical procedure for the last few decades and central pancreatectomy(CP)is an alternative surgical option.Whether CP better preserves remnant pancreatic endocrine and exocrine functions after surgery remains a subject of debate.AIM To evaluate the safety and efficacy of CP compared with DP for benign or lowgrade malignant pancreatic tumors in the neck and body of the pancreas.METHODS This retrospective study enrolled 296 patients who underwent CP or DP for benign and low-malignant neoplasms at the same hospital between January 2016 and March 2020.Perioperative outcomes and long-term morbidity of endocrine/exocrine function were prospectively evaluated.RESULTS No significant difference was observed in overall morbidity or clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula between the two groups(P=0.055).Delayed gastric emptying occurred more frequently in the CP group than in the DP group(29.4%vs 15.3%;P<0.005).None of the patients in the CP group had new-onset or aggravated distal metastasis,whereas 40 patients in the DP group had endocrine function deficiency after surgery(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in the incidence of diarrhea immediately after surgery,but at postoperative 12 mo,a significantly higher number of patients had diarrhea in the DP group than in the CP group(0%vs 9.5%;P<0.05).CONCLUSION CP is a generally safe procedure and is better than DP in preserving long-term pancreatic endocrine and exocrine functions.Therefore,CP might be a better option for treating benign or low-grade malignant neoplasms in suitable patients.

Middle segmental pancreatectomy: A safe and organ-preserving option for benign and low-grade malignant lesions

AIM: To study the feasibility and safety of middle segmental pancreatectomy (MSP) compared with pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and extended distal pancreatectomy (EDP). METHODS: We studied retrospectively 36 cases that underwent MSP, 44 patients who underwent PD, and 26 who underwent EDP with benign or low-grade malignant lesions in the mid-portion of the pancreas, between April 2003 and December 2009 in Ruijin Hospital. The perioperative outcomes and long-term outcomes of MSP were compared with those of EDP and PD. Periop-erative outcomes included operative time, intraoperative hemorrhage, transfusion, pancreatic fistula, intraabdominal abscess/infection, postoperative bleeding, reoperation, mortality, and postoperative hospital time. Long-term outcomes, including tumor recurrence, newonset diabetes mellitus (DM), and pancreatic exocrine insufficiency, were evaluated. RESULTS: Intraoperative hemorrhage was 316.1 ± 309.6, 852.2 ± 877.8 and 526.9 ± 414.5 mL for the MSP, PD and EDP groups, respectively (P < 0.05). The mean postoperative daily fasting blood glucose level was significantly lower in the MSP group than in the EDP group (6.3 ± 1.5 mmol/L vs 7.3 ± 1.5 mmol/L, P < 0.05). The rate of pancreatic fistula was higher in the MSP group than in the PD group (42% vs 20.5%, P = 0.039), all of the fistulas after MSP corresponded to grade A (9/15) or B (6/15) and were sealed following conservative treatment. There was no significant difference in the mean postoperative hospital stay between the MSP group and the other two groups. After a mean follow-up of 44 mo, no tumor recurrences were found, only one patient (2.8%) in the MSP group vs five (21.7%) in the EDP group developed new-onset insulin-dependent DM postoperatively (P = 0.029). Moreover, significantly fewer patients in the MSP group than in the PD (0% vs 33.3%, P < 0.001) and EDP (0% vs 21.7%, P = 0.007) required enzyme substitution. CONCLUSION: MSP is a safe and organ-preserving option for benign or low-grade malignant lesions in the neck and proximal body of the pancreas.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is as safe and feasible as open procedure:A meta-analysis

AIM:To evaluate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy(LDP) compared with open distal pancreatectomy(ODP).METHODS:Meta-analysis was performed using the databases,including PubMed,the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials,Web of Science and BIOSIS Previews.Articles should contain quantitative data of the comparison of LDP and ODP.Each article was reviewed by two authors.Indices of operative time,spleen-preserving rate,time to fluid intake,ratio of malignant tumors,postoperative hospital stay,incidence rate of pancreatic fistula and overall morbidity rate were analyzed.RESULTS:Nine articles with 1341 patients who underwent pancreatectomy met the inclusion criteria.LDP was performed in 501(37.4%) patients,while ODP was performed in 840(62.6%) patients.There were significant differences in the operative time,time to fluid intake,postoperative hospital stay and spleen-preserving rate between LDP and ODP.There was no difference between the two groups in pancreatic fistula rate [random effects model,risk ratio(RR) 0.996(0.663,1.494),P = 0.983,I2 = 28.4%] and overall morbidity rate [random effects model,RR 0.81(0.596,1.101),P = 0.178,I2 = 55.6%].CONCLUSION:LDP has the advantages of shorter hospital stay and operative time,more rapid recovery and higher spleen-preserving rate as compared with ODP.

Laparoscopic vs open distal pancreatectomy for solid pseudopapillary tumor of the pancreas

AIM:To compare short-and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic vs open distal pancreatectomy for solid pseudopapillary tumor(SPT)of the pancreas.METHODS:This retrospective study included 28 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy for SPT of the pancreas between 1998 and 2012.The patients were divided into two groups based on the surgical approach:the laparoscopic surgery group and the open surgery group.The patients’demographic data,operative results,pathological reports,hospital courses,morbidity and mortality,and follow-up data were compared between the two groups.RESULTS:Fifteen patients with SPT of the pancreas underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy(LDP),and 13 underwent open distal pancreatectomy(ODP).Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups except for a female predominance in the LDP group(100.0%vs 69.2%,P=0.035).Mortality,morbidity(33.3%vs 38.5%,P=1.000),pancreatic fistula rates(26.7%vs 30.8%,P=0.728),and reoperation rates(0.0%vs 7.7%,P=0.464)were similar in the two groups.There were no significant differences in the operating time(171 min vs 178 min,P=0.755)between the two groups.The intraoperative blood loss(149 mL vs 580 mL,P=0.002),transfusion requirement(6.7%vs 46.2%,P=0.029),first flatus time(1.9d vs 3.5 d,P=0.000),diet start time(2.3 d vs 4.9 d,P=0.000),and postoperative hospital stay(8.1 d vs 12.8d,P=0.029)were significantly less in the LDP group than in the ODP group.All patients had negative surgical margins at final pathology.There were no significant differences in number of lymph nodes harvested(4.6 vs6.4,P=0.549)between the two groups.The median follow-up was 33(3-100)mo for the LDP group and 45(17-127)mo for the ODP group.All patients were alive with one recurrence.CONCLUSION:LDP for SPT has short-term benefits compared with ODP.Long-term outcomes of LDP are similar to those of ODP.

Risk factors associated with pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy, which technique of pancreatic stump closure is more beneficial?

AIM: To identify risk factors related to pancreatic fistula in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy (DP) and to determine the effectiveness of using a stapled and a sutured closed of pancreatic stump. METHODS: Sixty-four patients underwent DP during a 10-year period. Information regarding diagnosis, operative details, and perioperative morbidity or mortality was collected. Eight risk factors were examined. RESULTS: Indications for DP included primary pancreatic disease (n = 38, 59%) and non-pancreatic malignancy (n = 26, 41%). Postoperative mortality and morbidity rates were 1.5% and 37% respectively; one patient died due to sepsis and two patients required a reoperation due to postoperative bleeding. Pancreatic fistula was developed in 14 patients (22%); 4 of fistulas were classified as Grade A, 9 as Grade B and only 1 as Grade C. Incidence of pancreatic fistula rate was significantly associated with four risk factors: pathology, use of prophylactic octreotide therapy, concomitant splenectomy, and texture of pancreatic parenchyma. The role that technique (either stapler or suture) of pancreatic stump closure plays in the development of pancreatic leak remains unclear. CONCLUSION: The pancreatic fistula rate after DP is 22%. This is reduced for patients with non-pancreatic malignancy, fibrotic pancreatic tissue, postoperative prophylactic octreotide therapy and concomitant splenectomy.

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic neoplasms:A retrospective study

AIM: To describe the clinical characteristics, technical procedures, and outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) for benign and malignant pancreatic neoplasms.

Perioperative intensive insulin therapy using artificial endocrine pancreas in patients undergoing pancreatectomy

Perioperative glycemic control is important for reducing postoperative infectious complications. However, clinical trials have shown that efforts to maintain normoglycemia in intensive care unit patients result in deviation of glucose levels from the optimal range, and frequent attacks of hypoglycemia. Tight glycemic control is even more challenging in those undergoing pancreatic resection. Removal of lesions and surrounding normal pancreatic tissue often cause hormone deficiencies that lead to the destruction of glucose homeostasis, which is termed pancreatogenic diabetes. Pancreatogenic diabetes is characterized by the occurrence of hyperglycemia and iatrogenic severe hypoglycemia, which adversely effects patient recovery. Postoperatively, a variety of factors including surgical stress, inflammatory cytokines, sympathomimetic drug therapy, and aggressive nutritional support can also affect glycemic control. This review discusses the endocrine aspects of pancreatic resection and highlights postoperative glycemic control using a closed-loop system or artificial pancreas. In previous experiments, we have demonstrated the reliability of the artificial pancreas in dogs with total pancreatectomy, and its postoperative clinical use has been shown to be effectiveand safe, without the occurrence of hypoglycemic episodes, even in patients after total pancreatectomy. Considering the increasing requirement for tight perioperative glycemic control and the recognized risk of hypoglycemia, we propose the use of an artificial endocrine pancreas that is able to monitor continuously blood glucose concentrations with proven accuracy, and administer automatically substances to return blood glucose concentration to the optimal narrow range.

Impact of postoperative glycemic control and nutritional status on clinical outcomes after total pancreatectomy

AIM To evaluate the impact of glycemic control and nutritional status after total pancreatectomy(TP) on complications, tumor recurrence and overall survival.METHODS Retrospective records of 52 patients with pancreatic tumors who underwent TP were collected from 2007 to 2015. A series of clinical parameters collected before and after surgery, and during the follow-up were evaluated. The associations of glycemic control and nutritional status with complications, tumor recurrence and long-term survival were determined. Risk factors for postoperative glycemic control and nutritional status were identified.RESULTS High early postoperative fasting blood glucose(FBG) levels(OR = 4.074, 95%CI: 1.188-13.965, P = 0.025) and low early postoperative prealbumin levels(OR = 3.816, 95%CI: 1.110-13.122, P = 0.034) were significantly associated with complications after TP. Postoperative Hb A1 c levels over 7%(HR = 2.655, 95%CI: 1.299-5.425, P = 0.007) were identified as one of the independent risk factors for tumor recurrence. Patients with postoperative Hb A1 c levels over 7% had much poorer overall survival than those with Hb A1 c levels less than 7%(9.3 mo vs 27.6 mo, HR = 3.212, 95%CI: 1.147-8.999, P = 0.026). Patients with long-term diabetes mellitus(HR = 15.019, 95%CI: 1.278-176.211, P= 0.031) and alcohol history(B = 1.985, SE = 0.860, P = 0.025) tended to have poor glycemic control and lower body mass index levels after TP, respectively.CONCLUSION At least 3 mo are required after TP to adapt to diabetes and recover nutritional status. Glycemic control appears to have more influence over nutritional status on longterm outcomes after TP. Improvement in glycemic control and nutritional status after TP is important to prevent early complications and tumor recurrence, and improve survival.

Perioperative management of distal pancreatectomy

Recent advances in surgical techniques and perioperative management have markedly reduced operative morbidity after distal pancreatectomy(DP).However,some questions remain regarding the protocol for the perioperative management of DP,in particular,with regard to the development of pancreatic fistula(PF).A review of DP was therefore conducted in order to standardize the management of patients for a favorable outcome.Overall,operative technique and perioperative management emerged as two critical factors contributing to favorable outcome in DP patients.As for the operative method,surgical and closure techniques exhibited differences in outcome.Laparoscopic DP generally yields more favorable perioperative outcomes compared to open DP,and is applicable for benign tumors and some ductal carcinomas of the pancreas.Robotic DP is also available for safe pancreatic surgery.En bloc celiac axis resection offers a high R0 resection rate and potentially allows for some local control in the case of advanced pancreatic cancer.Following resection,staple closure was not found to reduce the rate of PF when compared to hand-sewn closure.In addition,ultrasonic dissection devices,fibrin glue sealing,and staple closure with mesh reinforcement were shown to significantly reduce PF,although there was some bias in these studies.In perioperative management,both preoperative and postoperative treatment affected outcome.First,preoperative endoscopic pancreatic stenting may be an effective prophylactic measure against fistula development following DP in selected patients.Second,in postoperative management,a multifactorial approach including prophylactic antibiotics improved high surgical site infection rates following complex hepato-pancreatobiliary surgery.Furthermore,although conflicting results have been reported,somatostatin analogues should be administered selectively to patients considered to have a high risk for PF.Finally,careful drain management also facilitates a favorable outcome in patients with PF after DP.The results of the review indicate that laparoscopic DP coupled with perioperative management influences outcome in DP patients.