Single incision versus reduced port splenectomy--searching for the best alternative to conventional laparoscopic splenectomy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) is a well accepted approach for the treatment of multiple hematologic diseases. Single port access splenectomy (SPAS) emphasizes the concept of surgery through one small incision. The reduced port access splenectomy (RPAS) entails the use of fewer trocars of smaller sizes. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes after LS, SPAS, and RPAS, and to analyze the aesthetic result and patient satisfaction. METHODS: We included patients who underwent LS (group 1, n = 15), SPAS (group 2, n = 8), and RPAS (group 3, n = 10) between June 2008 and February 2012, whose final spleen weight was less of 500 g. The outcome parameters analyzed were operative time, need of additional trocars, blood loss, blood transfusion, weight of the spleen, postoperative complications, and duration of hospital stay. To evaluate the cosmetic result, patients were asked to take the Body Image Questionnaire. RESULTS: Patients in group 3 were younger than group 1. Operative time was significantly longer in group 2 compared to groups 1 and 3 (83 ± 19 vs. 131 ± 43 vs. 81 ± 22 min, p = 0.01). There was no need to convert to open surgery in any group, nor were there differences in intra- or postoperative outcome. There were no differences between the groups in relation to the analgesic requirements. Twenty-two out of the 33 patients answered the questionnaire. There was a significant advantage in group 2 and 3 in the body image index with respect to group 1. There were no differences between groups 2 and 3 (7.3 ± 2.8 vs. 5.8 ± 1.3 vs. 5.1 ± 0.4, p < 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: RPAS is a good alternative to LS and SPAS. It improves the aesthetic results as compared to LS, whereas minimizes the technical challenges faced with SPAS.

Outcomes and quality of life after partial pancreatectomy for noninsulinoma pancreatogenous hypoglycemia from diffuse islet cell disease.

BACKGROUND: Noninsulinoma pancreatogenous hypoglycemia (NIPH) is a rare cause of hypoglycemia, especially affecting postbariatric surgery patients, related to excessive insulin secretion. Partial pancreatectomy controls hypoglycemia in the early postoperative period; however, multiple patients have experienced symptomatic relapse. The study goal was to assess frequency and severity of recurrent symptoms in operated patients. METHODS: All patients who underwent pancreatic resection for NIPH at Mayo Clinic from January 1996 through December 2008 were reviewed for demographics, preoperative testing, operative and postoperative details. Data from patient records, mail survey, European Quality of Life Survey (EQ-5D), and Fear of Hypoglycemia Scale (FOHS) were used to assess outcome. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients underwent pancreatic resection for NIPH (5 dead, 1 incarcerated). 48 patients (70%) completed the survey; mean follow-up, 53 months. Median time to recurrent symptoms was 16 months in 41 patients (87%). Despite symptom recurrence, 36 patients (75%) reported overall improvement in symptoms and quality of life (QOL); median EQ-5D health scores increased from 40 to 75 out of 100 (P < .001). Moreover, they reported marked reduction in psychologic stress and hypoglycemic symptoms with greater than 50% decrease in FOHS overall, worry, and behavioral median scores (P < .001). Overall, half of the patients were classified as highly/moderately surgically successful, whereas the other half was minimally successful or surgical failures. CONCLUSION: Although nearly 90% of NIPH patients reported recurrent symptoms suggestive of hypoglycemia, a majority reported improvements in QOL and marked reduction in other symptoms after pancreatic resection. Nevertheless, 25% of patients experienced no benefit from partial pancreatectomy.

Prevention of postsplenectomy sepsis: how much do patients know?

INTRODUCTION: Asplenia causes a deficiency in immunity with a long-term risk of fulminant infection, associated with significant mortality. Patient compliance requires an understanding of risks of infection and its prevention. The impact of patient education has been little studied. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To ascertain the degree of knowledge held by patients who have undergone splenectomy, a comprehensive survey was designed. This also aimed to determine which group of health professionals was most successful in conveying information to patients. Patients who had undergone total splenectomy were interviewed by telephone, using a standardised list of questions to assess their understanding of the post-operation risks. RESULTS: Of 40 consecutive patients, 32.5% had a good knowledge of the risks of asplenia and their prevention, 52.5% had a fair knowledge and 15% a poor knowledge. Haematologists were most successful in initially conveying information to patients, and general practitioners also played a critical role in patient education. In this survey, it appears that surgeons were not effective at educating patients. CONCLUSION: Patient education postsplenectomy is poor. Measures to prevent infection in the asplenic patient are not being adequately implemented.

[The risk of splenectomy]. / Das Risiko der Splenektomie.

BACKGROUND: The controversely discussed effect of splenic loss and disturbances of the general state of health are to be reported by means of several check sheets. There is a control group for comparison and statistic evaluation. The results will be considered in relation to laboratory serum parameters. PATIENTS AND METHOD: 111 patients splenectomized for various reasons could be examined 3 to 17 years following surgery. We applied the depression check sheet by Beck, the Giessen complaint check sheet, and a specific splenectomy check sheet. The latter served to inquire an additional control group of statistic twins who underwent comparable upper abdominal surgery, but not splenectomy. Furthermore, 42 laboratory serum parameters were determined in every splenectomized patient. RESULTS: Compared to random tests with the Federal Republic's population, the Giessen complaint check sheet detected a more frequently disturbed state of health in "spleenless". An evaluation of the specific splenectomy check sheet detected an increased trend for infections after splenectomy (p = 0.0000001) compared to those after upper abdominal surgery. There was no statistical proof for other typical symptoms such as incompatibility with alcohol or vegetative dystonia. There was no significant anomaly in the 42 parameters measured. CONCLUSION: Every other splenectomized patient complained about frequent infections and, consequently, disturbed state of health (physical weakness, early exhaustion). These complaints did not correlate to the measured laboratory serum parameters.

Decision analysis in children with blunt splenic trauma: the effects of observation, splenorrhaphy, or splenectomy on quality-adjusted life expectancy.

The management of blunt splenic trauma in children has remained controversial, with different physicians advocating observation, splenorrhaphy, and splenectomy. Proponents for each position have debated the relative importance of rebleeding (delayed splenic rupture), posttransfusion hepatitis with its sequelae, and overwhelming postsplenectomy sepsis. In an attempt to guide the clinician, a decision analysis was performed. Variables evaluated included the incidence of transfusion, postsplenectomy sepsis, posttransfusion hepatitis, chronic active hepatitis, cirrhosis, and rebleeding. The quality-adjusted life expectancies (QALEs) when the average incidence of the variables were used in the decision analysis were 62.69 years for observation, 62.32 years for splenorrhaphy, and 61.14 years for splenectomy. Sensitivity analysis showed that there was very little difference between observation and splenorrhaphy when the transfusion rate and hepatitis rate were varied. But these treatment options produced longer QALEs than splenectomy. Therefore, in appropriately selected patients, observation is a safe and effective therapeutic option. If an operation is necessary, every effort should be made to preserve the spleen. Splenectomy may still be required in those cases of complete devascularization, persistent hemorrhage, or other associated significant injuries.