Left-sided Pancreatectomy

David A. Kooby(Emory Healthcare), Theresa Gillespie(University of Cincinnati), David J. Bentrem(Washington University in St. Louis), Attila Nakeeb(Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis), Max Schmidt(Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis), Nipun B. Merchant(Vanderbilt University), Alex Parikh(Vanderbilt University), Robert C.G. Martin(University of Louisville), Charles R. Scoggins(University of Louisville), Syed A. Ahmad(Emory University), Han Jo Kim(University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill), Jae Min Park(University of Cincinnati), Fabian M. Johnston(Northwestern University), Matthew J. Strouch(Washington University in St. Louis), Alex Menze(Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis), Jennifer A. Rymer(Vanderbilt University), Rebecca J. McClaine(University of Cincinnati), Steven M. Strasberg(Northwestern University), Marina Talamonti(Northwestern University), Charles A. Staley(University of Cincinnati), Kelly M. McMasters(University of Louisville), Andrew M. Lowy(University of Cincinnati), Johnita Byrd-Sellers(University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill), William C. Wood(Emory University), William G. Hawkins(Northwestern University)
Annals of Surgery
September 1, 2008
10.1097/sla.0b013e318185a990
Cited by 390

Abstract

In Brief Objectives: To compare perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic left-sided pancreatectomy (LLP) with traditional open left-sided pancreatectomy (OLP) in a multicenter experience. Summary and Background Data: LLP is being performed more commonly with limited data comparing results with outcomes from OLP. Methods: Data from 8 centers were combined for all cases performed between 2002–2006. OLP and LLP cohorts were matched by age, American Society of Anesthesiologists, resected pancreas length, tumor size, and diagnosis. Multivariate analysis was performed using binary logistic regression. Results: Six hundred sixty-seven LPs were performed, with 159 (24%) attempted laparoscopically. Indications were solid lesion in 307 (46%), cystic in 295 (44%), and pancreatitis in 65 (10%) cases. Positive margins occurred in 51 (8%) cases, 335 (50%) had complications, and significant leaks occurred in 108 (16%). Conversion to OLP occurred in 20 (13%) of the LLPs. In the matched comparison, 200 OLPs were compared with 142 LLPs. There were no differences in positive margin rates (8% vs. 7%, P = 0.8), operative times (216 vs. 230 minutes, P = 0.3), or leak rates (18% vs. 11%, P = 0.1). LLP patients had lower average blood loss (357 vs. 588 mL, P < 0.01), fewer complications (40% vs. 57%, P < 0.01), and shorter hospital stays (5.9 vs. 9.0 days, P < 0.01). By MVA, LLP was an independent factor for shorter hospital stay (P < 0.01, odds ratio 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.19–0.56). Conclusions: In selected patients, LLP is associated with less morbidity and shorter LOS than OLP. Pancreatic fistula rates are similar for OLP and LLP. LLP is appropriate for selected patients with left-sided pancreatic pathology. A multi-institutional study of 667 patients undergoing left pancreatectomy over 5 years was performed. Cohort-matched outcomes for open (N = 200) versus laparoscopic (N = 142) procedures were compared. No differences were seen in major complications or clinically significant fistula rates. Average hospital stay was 3 days shorter for patients undergoing laparoscopic left pancreatectomy.

Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis