Research Article
Laparoscopic versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy: Comparative Analysis of Clinical Outcomes at a Single Institution
Nicolás Jarufe*, Pedro P. Soto, Vanessa Ahumada, Jose P. Salinas, Jose L. Galindo, Jean-Phillipe Bächler, Pablo Achurra, Rolando A. Rebolledo, Juan F. Guerra and Jorge Martinez
Department of Digestive Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Hospital Clínico Pontificia, Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
- *Corresponding Author:
- Nicolás Jarufe. MD.
Chief of Department, Department of Digestive Surgery Faculty of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
Marcoleta 350, Patio Interior, División de Cirugía, Santiago, 8330033, Chile
Tel: 56992991399
E-mail: njarufe@med.puc.cl
Received date: March 31, 2016; Accepted date: June 2, 2016; Published date: June 8, 2016
Citation: Jarufe N, Soto PP, Ahumada VJ, Salinas P, Galindo JL, et al. (2016) Laparoscopic versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy: Comparative Analysis of Clinical Outcomes at a Single Institution. J Gastrointest Dig Syst 6:434. doi:10.4172/2161-069X.1000434
Copyright: © 2016 Jarufe N, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Abstract
Background: Distal pancreatectomy (DP) is a standard operation for many pancreatic diseases located to the left of the superior mesenteric vein. Advances in technology have made laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) a safe and feasible procedure. In this study, we reviewed our experience with LDP and compared with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) for the management of benign and malignant lesions. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review of medical records of 93 patients subjected to a DP (ODP=36; LDP=57) for pancreatic tumors between 2001-2015 in the Department of Digestive Surgery of Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. In each patient clinical and surgical characteristic, postoperative evolution and histopathologic examination was analyzed. Results: LDP was associated with significantly less operative blood loss (300 ml vs. 50 ml; p=0.007), higher spleen preservation rate (52.6% vs. 19.2%; p=0.002) and shorter hospital stay (5 days vs. 8 days; p<0.001). There were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups Conclusions: LDP is a safe and feasible procedure for DP resections. LDP offers advantages over ODP in terms of reduction of operative blood loss, higher spleen preservation rate and shorter hospital stay.
