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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

早期目标导向活动方案对胰腺肿瘤切除术后患者活动的影响

目的:分析早期目标导向活动方案在胰腺肿瘤切除术后患者中的临床应用效果,以期提高患者术后早期活动的有效性及主动性,促进患者术后康复。方法:随机选取2023年3月—5月在上海市某三级甲等医院完成胰腺手术的35名患者为对照组,2023年6月—8月的35名患者为实验组。对照组采取胰腺肿瘤切除术后常规护理措施,实验组除采取常规护理,在督促患者早期下床活动方面应用早期目标导向活动方案。对比两组患者术后首次下床、肛门排气、排便、经口饮水、导尿管拔除及胃管拔除时间来评价方案有效性;对比两组患者术后并发症及活动相关不良事件发生情况来评价方案安全性。结果:两组患者首次下床、肛门排气、排便、经口饮水时间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),导尿管拔除、胃管拔除时间及术后并发症发生情况差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),两组患者均未发生活动相关不良事件。结论:早期目标导向活动方案对促进胰腺肿瘤切除术后患者早下床、早经口饮水、术后排气和排便方面是安全、有效的,且不增加术后出血、非计划拔管、死亡等风险。

全胰切除术与胰十二指肠切除术治疗胰腺癌的手术疗效和生活质量对比分析:基于倾向性评分匹配的回顾性队列研究

目的探究全胰切除术(total pancreatectomy,TP)与胰十二指肠切除术(pancreaticoduodenectomy,PD)治疗胰腺癌患者的术后短期并发症与长期预后差异。方法回顾性收集北京协和医院2016年1月至2021年12月行TP(TP组)和2019年1月至2021年12月行PD(PD组)的胰腺癌患者临床资料。根据危险因素的不同,将PD组患者分为胰瘘高风险PD组和复发高风险PD组。采用倾向性评分法匹配后,比较TP组与胰瘘高风险PD组、复发高风险PD组术后短期手术疗效指标(术后并发症发生率、30 d死亡率、住院时间等)、长期手术疗效指标(总生存期)及生活质量差异。结果共入选符合纳入与排除标准的TP组患者32例,PD组174例(胰瘘高风险PD组99例,复发高风险PD组15例)。(1)TP组与胰瘘高风险PD组:经倾向性评分匹配后,最终纳入TP组患者29例、胰瘘高风险PD组患者56例。TP组无胰瘘发生,胰瘘高风险PD组胰瘘发生率为19.64%(P=0.027),两组其他术后并发症发生率、Clavien-Dindo分级、住院时间、ICU停留时间、30 d死亡率等短期手术疗效指标均无统计学差异(P均>0.05)。中位随访时间36个月时,两组生命质量核心量表(quality of life questionnaire-core 30,QLQ-C30)评分均无显著差异(P均>0.05)。(2)TP组与复发高风险PD组:由于两组基线资料均无统计学差异(P均>0.05),故TP组32例患者、复发高风险PD组15例患者均纳入分析。TP组无胰瘘发生,复发高风险PD组胰瘘发生率为20.00%(P=0.028),两组其他术后并发症发生率、Clavien-Dindo分级、住院时间、ICU停留时间、30 d死亡率等短期手术疗效指标亦无统计学差异(P均>0.05)。截至末次随访,与复发高风险PD组比较,TP组中位总生存期更长(37.68个月比15.24个月,HR=2.551,95%CI:1.144~5.689,P=0.018);多因素Cox回归分析显示,复发高风险PD、术前合并梗阻性黄疸是胰腺癌患者长期预后不良的独立危险因素。结论对于胰瘘高风险胰腺癌患者,TP可取得与PD相当的短期手术疗效和长期生活质量,且术后无胰瘘负担。对于复发高风险胰腺癌患者,TP可在保证手术安全性的基础上显著延长患者生存期。

胰腺囊性肿瘤患者行胰体尾切除术后新发糖尿病预后因素的初步探讨

目的探讨胰腺囊性肿瘤患者行胰体尾切除术后新发糖尿病(new-onset diabetes mellitus,NODM)的预后因素。方法回顾分析2010年1月~2019年12月我院92例胰腺囊性肿瘤行腹腔镜胰体尾切除的临床资料,根据入选和排除标准,共纳入74例,按照术后随访期间是否发生NODM分为NODM组(n=26)和糖代谢正常组(n=48),采用单因素分析胰腺囊性肿瘤患者行腹腔镜胰体尾切除术后NODM的预后因素。P<0.05认为差异有显著性,OR>4认为有潜在临床意义的NODM预后因素。结果26例胰腺囊性肿瘤行胰体尾切除术后NODM(35.1%),确诊NODM中位时间为9个月(3~56个月)。单因素分析显示颈部胰腺离断颈部(OR=11.000,P=0.000)、有糖尿病家族史(OR=5.000,P=0.004)和BMI≥25.0(OR=4.333,P=0.007)是术后NODM的预后因素。结论胰腺囊性肿瘤行胰体尾切除时应尽可能保留更多的胰腺组织,避免在颈部离断胰腺,BMI≥25.0和糖尿病家族史的患者术后应密切关注糖代谢情况。

腹腔镜胰腺中段切除术后并发胆囊结石的危险因素分析

目的:探讨腹腔镜胰腺中段切除术后发生胆囊结石的影响因素。方法:回顾分析2021年6月至2023年8月为58例患者行腹腔镜胰腺中段切除术(LCP)的临床资料及随访资料,根据术后是否并发胆囊结石分为并发组与未并发组,分析LCP术后发生胆囊结石的影响因素。结果:58例患者中17例术后发生胆囊结石,发生率为29.3%。统计分析显示,两组患者术后体重下降过多(≥5%)、胰瘘(B级/C级)、胃排空延迟、BMI、奥曲肽用量差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);多因素Logistic回归分析显示,术后体重下降过多(OR=7.156,P<0.05)、胰瘘(OR=8.494,P<0.05)、BMI(OR=1.391,P<0.05)为LCP术后并发胆囊结石的独立危险因素。结论:术后体重下降过多、胰瘘、BMI是LCP术后并发胆囊结石的独立危险因素,可增加LCP术后并发胆囊结石的风险。围手术期治疗中应加强危险因素的识别与评估,根据患者病情予以临床干预,以减少LCP术后胆道并发症的发生。

胰体尾切除术后发生胃排空延迟的危险因素分析

目的探讨胰体尾切除术(DP)后发生胃排空延迟(DGE)的危险因素。方法回顾性分析2015年6月至2023年6月于扬州大学附属医院肝胆外科接受DP的75例患者的临床资料,采用单因素及多因素Logistic回归模型分析DGE发生的独立危险因素。结果75例患者中有16例(21.3%)术后发生DGE,其中A级12例(16.00%),B级3例(4.00%),C级1例(1.33%)。单因素分析结果显示,DGE组与非DGE组的术后腹腔出血、术后B级/C级胰瘘、术后腹腔感染、术后乳糜瘘占比比较,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。多因素Logistic回归分析结果显示,术后B级/C级胰瘘是DP术后发生DGE的独立危险因素(P<0.05)。结论术后B级/C级胰瘘是DP术后发生DGE的独立危险因素,围手术期避免胰瘘的发生有助于降低DGE的发生率。

脾脏联合胰尾切除在上皮性卵巢癌肿瘤细胞减灭术中的临床观察

目的探讨上皮性卵巢癌(epithelial ovarian cancer,EOC)肿瘤细胞减灭术中行脾脏联合胰尾切除的安全性和疗效。方法选取2015年12月至2022年9月在复旦大学附属中山医院和中国科学技术大学附属第一医院(安徽省立医院)EOC肿瘤细胞减灭术中接受脾脏联合胰尾切除的患者共17例,回顾性分析患者的临床特点、手术信息、术后并发症及生存随访。结果17例患者包括13例初治和4例复发EOC患者。术前影像提示脾门转移的患者有11例(64.7%),术中发现6例脾门及胰尾肿瘤转移。术后脾窝放置负压引流管,监测引流液淀粉酶,引流管移除中位时间为8(3~12)天。术后4例患者发生生化漏(A级胰瘘),3例发生B级胰瘘,无C级胰瘘。2例行经皮穿刺引流后好转,其余持续引流、生长抑素、抗生素治疗后好转,无围手术期死亡,术后恢复至化疗中位时间为17.5(13~37)天。中位随访时间为14(4~64)个月,中位无进展生存期为10(5~32)个月。结论脾脏联合胰尾切除术在EOC肿瘤细胞减灭术中可行,通过适当的防治措施,术后并发症胰瘘可控。

Quality of life after pancreatic surgery

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 pancre-atectomy(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 Core Tip:This review summarizes and analyzes current research results on quality of life(QOL)after pancreatic surgery.The article covers the discussion and analysis of the QOL of various pancreatic surgeries.Which kind of surgical procedure has better QOL is controversial.The long-term benefits on QOL of minimally invasive surgery over open surgery are contro-INTRODUCTION The pancreas,located in the retroperitoneum,is a glandular organ with endocrine and exocrine functions.It can be divided into four main parts:Head,neck,body,and tail.Pancreatic surgery can be divided into pancreaticoduoden-ectomy(PD),duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection(DPPHR),distal pancreatectomy(DP),central pancre-atectomy(CP),and total pancreatectomy(TP).Pancreatic surgery is challenging due to the organ’s complex anatomical structure,peripheral vascularity,and intractable postoperative complications.Following the standardization of surgical steps and improvements in relevant medical techniques and surgical instruments,the safety of pancreatic surgery has significantly improved.Perioperative morbidity,mortality,and other related indicators have become more acceptable.However,owing to the organ’s essential role in digestion,absorption,and blood glucose regulation,changes in the quality of life(QOL)of patients after pancreatic surgery have attracted the attention of surgeons.More patients with non-malignant pancreatic diseases are willing to undergo surgical treatment because of the acceptable safety.In this case,from the perspective of the patient postoperatively,the significance of rehabilitation reflects the traditional perioperative outcome and QOL[1].The QOL is a new concept that extends beyond health.Although there is no consensus on its conception[2],we can consider it a multi-dimensional architecture that incorporates objective and individual subjective views of aspects of one’s physical,psychological,and social well-being[3-5].It includes evaluating physical health,and many subscales,such as emotion,job,culture,family,sociability,economy,cognition,happiness,sex,and some symptoms[6].Since people have realized the importance of QOL,many QOL scales have emerged,including the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30,European Quality of Life 5-dimension,36-item Short,etc.However,it is challenging to follow up on patients’QOL once they are discharged from the hospital.Consequently,most relevant studies had small sample sizes or lacked long-term follow-up results.Moreover,a summary of studies on QOL after pancreatic surgery is lacking.This study assessed the QOL in patients who underwent PD,DPPHR,DP,CP and TP.We conducted this study to describe the existing findings on the QOL after pancreatic surgery to make it easier for surgeons and patients to decide on a surgical approach.In addition,we attempted to identify controversial results to encourage further targeted research.

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for sporadic benign insulinoma:Short-and long-term outcomes

Background:Minimally invasive surgery is the optimal treatment for insulinoma.The present study aimed to compare short-and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic surgery for sporadic benign insulinoma.Methods:A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic surgery for insulinoma at our center between September 2007 and December 2019 was conducted.The demographic,perioperative and postoperative follow-up results were compared between the laparoscopic and robotic groups.Results:A total of 85 patients were enrolled,including 36 with laparoscopic approach and 49 with robotic approach.Enucleation was the preferred surgical procedure.Fifty-nine patients(69.4%)underwent enucleation;among them,26 and 33 patients underwent laparoscopic and robotic surgery,respectively.Robotic enucleation had a lower conversion rate to laparotomy(0 vs.19.2%,P=0.013),shorter operative time(102.0 vs.145.5 min,P=0.008)and shorter postoperative hospital stay(6.0 vs.8.5 d,P=0.002)than laparoscopic enucleation.There were no differences between the groups in terms of intraoperative blood loss,the rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula and complications.After a median follow-up of 65 months,two patients in the laparoscopic group developed a functional recurrence and none of the patients in the robotic group had a recurrence.Conclusions:Robotic enucleation can reduce the conversion rate to laparotomy and shorten operative time,which might lead to a reduction in postoperative hospital stay.

Pancreatic surgery and tertiary pancreatitis services warrant provision for support from a specialist diabetes team

Pancreatic surgery units undertake several complex operations,albeit with consi-derable morbidity and mortality,as is the case for the management of complicated acute pancreatitis or chronic pancreatitis.The centralisation of pancreatic surgery services,with the development of designated large-volume centres,has contribu-ted to significantly improved outcomes.In this editorial,we discuss the complex associations between diabetes mellitus(DM)and pancreatic/periampullary disease in the context of pancreatic surgery and overall management of complex pancreatitis,highlighting the consequential needs and the indispensable role of specialist diabetes teams in support of tertiary pancreatic services.Type 3c pan-creatogenic DM,refers to DM developing in the setting of exocrine pancreatic disease,and its identification and management can be challenging,while the glycaemic control of such patients may affect their course of treatment and outcome.Adequate preoperative diabetes assessment is warranted to aid identification of patients who are likely to need commencement or escalation of glucose lowering therapy in the postoperative period.The incidence of new onset diabetes after pancreatic resection is widely variable in the literature,and depends on the type and extent of pancreatic resection,as is the case with pancreatic parenchymal loss in the context of severe pancreatitis.Early involvement of a specialist diabetes team is essential to ensure a holistic management.In the current era,large volume pancreatic surgery services commonly abide by the principles of enhanced recovery after surgery,with inclusion of provisions for optimisation of the perioperative glycaemic control,to improve outcomes.While various guidelines are available to aid perioperative management of DM,auditing and quality improvement platforms have highlighted deficiencies in the perioperative management of diabetic patients and areas of required improvement.The need for perioperative support of diabetic patients by specialist diabetes teams is uniformly underlined,a fact that becomes clearly more prominent at all different stages in the setting of pancreatic surgery and the management of complex pancreatitis.Therefore,pancreatic surgery and tertiary pancreatitis services must be designed with a provision for support from specialist diabetes teams.With the ongoing accumulation of evidence,it would be reasonable to consider the design of specific guidelines for the glycaemic management of these patients.

腹腔镜保脾胰体尾切除术Kimura法和Warshaw法围术期临床疗效对比

目的探讨腹腔镜下Kimura法和Warshaw法两种保脾胰体尾切除术的围术期疗效与安全性。方法回顾性分析2017年8月至2023年8月于空军军医大学西京医院接受腹腔镜下保脾胰体尾切除术的133例患者临床资料,根据手术方式不同分为Kimura组(77例)和Warshaw组(56例),比较两组患者手术时长、术中出血量等围术期指标及术后胰瘘发生率、脾梗死等并发症发生情况。结果Kimura组和Warshaw组两组患者在手术时长[(215.8±64.8)min vs(193.5±77.6)min]、术中出血量[(194.2±53.7)mLvs(176.5±69.2)mL]、术后排气及禁食时间[2(1)d vs 3(1)d]、术后住院时间[9(4)d vs 8(3)d]等围术期指标及术后胰瘘(3例vs 4例)、脾梗死(0例vs 3例)、腹腔积液(3例vs 2例)、腹腔感染(2例vs 1例)等并发症发生情况方面比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论腹腔镜下Kimura法和Warshaw法两种保脾胰体尾切除术对于胰体尾良性及低度恶性肿瘤均是安全有效的手术方式,且围术期疗效相当。

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.

Parenchyma-sparing pancreatectomies for benign or border-line tumors of the pancreas

Standard pancreatic resections, such as pancreaticoduodenectomy, distal pancreatectomy, or total pancreatectomy, result in an important loss of normal pancreatic parenchyma and may cause impairment of exocrine and endocrine function. Whilst these procedures are mandatory for malignant tumors, they seem to be too extensive for benign or border-line tumors, especially in patients with a long life expectancy. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in parenchyma-sparing pancreatic surgery with the aim of achieving better functional results without compromising oncological radicality in patients with benign, border-line or low-grade malignant tumors. Several limited resections have been introduced for isolated or multiple pancreatic lesions, depending on the location of the tumor: central pancreatectomy, duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection with or without segmental duodenectomy, inferior head resection, dorsal pancreatectomy, excavation of the pancreatic head, middle-preserving pancreatectomy, and other multiple segmental resections. All these procedures are technically feasible in experienced hands,with very low mortality, although with high morbidity rate when compared to standard procedures. Pancreatic endocrine and exocrine function is better preserved with good quality of life in most of the patients, and tumor recurrence is uncommon. Careful patient selection and expertise in pancreatic surgery are crucial to achieve the best results.

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.

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 shortterm 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' experience with advanced laparoscopic and robotic skills has been growing around the world, new innovations and breakthrough in minimally invasive pancreatic procedures will evolve.