Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy from multi-port to reduced-port 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.

Reduced-port robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a single-surgeon experience.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Multiple-port robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has been increasingly used as an alternative to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) in pancreatic cancer. However, the comparative safety and efficacy of reduced-port RPD versus OPD are unknown. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study comprising adult patients who underwent reduced-port RPD (single-port or single-site plus one port) or OPD for malignant tumors of the pancreas and periampullary region from July 2015 to October 2020 at a single center. We collected data on the patient demographics, perioperative results, oncologic outcomes, and one-year survival. RESULTS: Forty-five patients underwent reduced-port RPD, and 13 underwent OPD. There were no significant differences in the age, sex, body mass index, ASA score, tumor location, or occurrences of postoperative complications between the two groups. Compared with OPD, reduced-port RPD was associated with less blood loss (300 ml [95% confidence interval {CI} 155-700] vs. 650 ml [95% CI 300-850], p value = 0.11) but a longer operative time (325 min [95% CI 290-370] vs. 215 min [95% CI 180-270], p value < 0.001). Compared with patients who underwent OPD, patients who underwent reduced-port RPD had a higher 1-year survival rate (68% [95% CI 49-81] vs. 22% [95% CI 3-51], log-rank, p value = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Reduced-port RPD can be safely performed in experienced surgeons and is associated with better perioperative and oncologic outcomes than OPD.

Application of a commercial single-port device for robotic single-incision distal pancreatectomy: initial experience.

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy has proven to be feasible and safe. Moreover, robotic surgery provides unique advantages for pancreatic procedures, although single-incision robotic pancreatic surgery is rarely discussed. We applied the single-port modified platform to accomplish robotic distal pancreatectomy in a series of patients. METHODS: The subjects of this study were ten patients who underwent robotic distal pancreatectomy in our hospital between July 1, 2015 and Dec 31, 2016. All patients were placed supine in the reverse Trendelenburg position with the legs abducted. Surgery was performed via a trans-umbilical 5.0-cm incision, using a modified single-port platform (LAGIPORT®) combined with the da Vinci Si Surgical System. The three arms and scope (30-degree up) were inserted through the LAGIPORT® and positioned in a triangle. Endoscopic ultrasound was used to localize the tumor and plan the resection margin. We recorded the surgical time, operation time, blood loss, postoperative pain score, hospital stay, and complications. RESULTS: The surgical time was 236 ± 32 min, the operation time was 172 ± 30 min, and the blood loss was 149 ± 65 ml. All patients underwent robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy without conversion. The average pain score on postoperative day (POD) 3 was 4.5 ± 1. Complications included subsplenic hematoma (n = 1) and minor pancreatic leakage (n = 2). There was no surgical mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate the safety and efficiency of robotic single-incision distal pancreatectomy via the modified platform (LAGIPORT®).