Dataset Information

Total laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreato-splenectomy with left-posterior superior mesenteric artery first-approach for distal pancreatic cancer: step-by-step technique with a surgical case report (with video).

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Left-sided pancreatic cancers are uncommon but seem more aggressive than tumors of pancreatic head. Radical antegrade modular pancreato-splenectomy (RAMPS) was proved to have safe and effective advantages while comparing with standard retrograde pancreato-splenectomy (SRPS) in recent systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses. Laparoscopic SMA first-approach RAMPS was recently proceeded with optimistic perioperative outcomes.

Case presentation

Our patient is a 67-year-old female with a medical history of diabetes and hypertension, recruited because of upper left quadrant abdominal pain. She was referred for pancreato-splenectomy because of a 3-cm-sized mass in distal pancreas. We use 5 trocars and the patient placed in a Trendelenburg position. The retroperitoneum is opened at the left-posterior side of the meso-pancreato-duodenum along to the inframesocolic space, so that the anterior surface of the aorta (AO), inferior vena cave (IVC), left renal vein (LRV), left adrenal grand (LAG), and kidney are completely exposed. The inferior border of the pancreas had been dissected and separated from the superior mesenteric vein (SMV) below the pancreatic isthmus, removed the lymph nodes (LNs) groups 14v and 17. Then, dissect of LNs groups 7,8,9,11p,12 en bloc at the superior side of the pancreas. Dissection of LNs group 14p, d or SMA LNs after transecting the pancreas. The operation time was 240 min, the estimated blood loss was 200 ml. With no postoperative complications as well as no diarrhea, the patient was discharged on the POD10 uneventfully. Pathological result: pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with T2N1 staging and negative margin (R0).

Conclusions

This technique was safe and effective to perform precise and complete lymphadenectomy and negative posterior resection in total laparoscopic left-posterior SMA first-approach RAMPS for distal pancreatic cancer.

SUBMITTER: Nguyen TK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9254562 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLaparoscopic aortomesenteric bypass may be performed to treat the chronic mesenteric ischemia patients who are not suitable for endovascular treatment. This study presents an initial experience with a limited series of laparoscopic mesenteric artery revascularization for the treatment of mesenteric ischemia.MethodsChronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI) patients with previous unsuccessful endovascular treatment or with arterial occlusion and extensive calcification precluding safe endovascular treatment were offered laparoscopic mesenteric revascularization. From October 2015 until November 2018, nine patients with CMI underwent laparoscopic revascularization. In addition to demographic data and perioperative results of the treatment, graft patency was assessed with Duplex ultrasound at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months, and annually thereafter. A descriptive analysis of the data was performed.ResultsAll bypasses were constructed with an 8 mm ring enforced expanded polytetrafluoroethylene graft in a retrograde fashion (from infrarenal aorta or iliac artery) to either superior mesenteric artery or splenic artery (2 cases). Median operation time was 356 mins (range 247-492 mins). Five patients had a history of unsuccessful endovascular treatment. Laparoscopic technical success was 78%, and the primary open conversion rate was 22%. All laparoscopic revascularization procedures remained patent after discharge during a median follow-up time of 26 months (range 18-49 months). The primary graft patency at 30 days was 78%. Primary assisted, and secondary graft patency was 78% and 100%, respectively. Median weight gain was 2 kg (range 2-18 kg), and all patients achieved relief from postprandial pain and nausea. No mortality was observed during the follow-up period.ConclusionLaparoscopic aortomesenteric revascularization procedures for chronic mesenteric ischemia are feasible but require careful patient selection. These procedures should only be performed at referral centers by vascular surgeons with prior experience in laparoscopic vascular surgery.

Project description:BackgroundThis study evaluated the perioperative complications and the long-term pancreatic survival outcomes in patients treated with radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) and distal pancreatectomy (DP).MethodWe performed a computer search on the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases to retrieve the RCT or clinical trials comparing RAMPS and DP published before July of 2018. The quality of the included trials was assessed according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria by two researchers independently. The RevMan 5.3 software was used to extract and analyze the data.ResultA total of 5 retroprospective clinical trial articles comprising 285 patients were included in the study. The number of patients who underwent RAMPS were 135 and 150 for DP. There were significant differences (P < 0.05) in the operation time [WMD = - 63.93, 95% CI (- 68.86 ~ - 58.99), P<0.00001], and bleeding volume [WMD = - 184.62, 95% CI (- 211.88 ~ - 157.37), P<0.00001] between the two groups. However, no significant differences were observed between RAMPS and DP in terms of pancreatic fistula, postoperative complications, postoperative hospital stay, and mortality (P>0. 05). As for pathological examination, there were statistically significant differences between RAMPS and DP in the R0 resection rate [RR = 2.37, 95% CI (1.19 ~ 4.72), P = 0.01] and the number of lymph node excision [WMD = 7.08, 95% CI (4.59 ~ 9.58), P<0.000013]. The one-year overall survival rate was higher in RAMPS patients compared to DP patients [RR = 1.20, 95% CI (1.02 ~ 1.41), P = 0.02]. But there were no significant difference in postoperative recurrence [RR = 0.85, 95% CI (0.70 ~ 1.04), P = 0.13] between the two groups.ConclusionRAMPS is an effective procedure for clinical application. Nevertheless, large, multicenter prospective randomized controlled trias are required to validate these findings.ConclusionThe RAMPS procedure was associated with good postoperative outcomes and overall survival, indicating that it is an effective procedure for clinical application. Large, multicenter prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to validate these findings.