International Expert Consensus on Precision Anatomy for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: PAM-HBP Surgery Project.
consensus
distal pancreatectomy
laparoscopic
minimally invasive
spleen-preserving
Journal
Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences
ISSN: 1868-6982
Titre abrégé: J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 101528587
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2022
Jan 2022
Historique:
revised:
29
09
2021
received:
25
08
2021
accepted:
20
10
2021
pubmed:
1
11
2021
medline:
2
2
2022
entrez:
31
10
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Surgical views with high resolution and magnification have enabled us to recognize the precise anatomical structures that can be used as landmarks during minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP). This study aimed to validate the usefulness of anatomy-based approaches for MIDP before and during the Expert Consensus Meeting: Precision Anatomy for Minimally Invasive HBP Surgery (February 24, 2021). Twenty-five international MIDP experts developed clinical questions regarding surgical anatomy and approaches for MIDP. Studies identified via a comprehensive literature search were classified using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology. Online Delphi voting was conducted after experts had drafted the recommendations, with the goal of obtaining >75% consensus. Experts discussed the revised recommendations in front of the validation committee and an international audience of 384 attendees. Finalized recommendations were made after a second round of online Delphi voting. Four clinical questions were addressed, resulting in 10 recommendations. All recommendations reached at least a 75% consensus among experts. The expert consensus on precision anatomy for MIDP has been presented as a set of recommendations based on available evidence and expert opinions. These recommendations should guide experts and trainees in performing safe MIDP and foster its appropriate dissemination worldwide.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Surgical views with high resolution and magnification have enabled us to recognize the precise anatomical structures that can be used as landmarks during minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP). This study aimed to validate the usefulness of anatomy-based approaches for MIDP before and during the Expert Consensus Meeting: Precision Anatomy for Minimally Invasive HBP Surgery (February 24, 2021).
METHODS
METHODS
Twenty-five international MIDP experts developed clinical questions regarding surgical anatomy and approaches for MIDP. Studies identified via a comprehensive literature search were classified using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology. Online Delphi voting was conducted after experts had drafted the recommendations, with the goal of obtaining >75% consensus. Experts discussed the revised recommendations in front of the validation committee and an international audience of 384 attendees. Finalized recommendations were made after a second round of online Delphi voting.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Four clinical questions were addressed, resulting in 10 recommendations. All recommendations reached at least a 75% consensus among experts.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The expert consensus on precision anatomy for MIDP has been presented as a set of recommendations based on available evidence and expert opinions. These recommendations should guide experts and trainees in performing safe MIDP and foster its appropriate dissemination worldwide.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
161-173Informations de copyright
© 2021 Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery.
Références
Vollmer CM, Asbun HJ, Barkun J, Besselink MG, Boggi U, Conlon KC, et al. Proceedings of the first international state-of-the-art conference on minimally-invasive pancreatic resection (MIPR). HPB (Oxford). 2017;19:171-7.
Asbun HJ, Moekotte AL, Vissers FL, Kunzler F, Cipriani F, Alseidi A, et al. The Miami International Evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection. Ann Surg. 2020;271:1-14.
Kooby DA, Gillespie T, Bentrem D, Nakeeb A, Schmidt MC, Merchant NB, et al. Left-sided pancreatectomy: a multicenter comparison of laparoscopic and open approaches. Ann Surg. 2008;248:438-46.
Kooby DA, Hawkins WG, Schmidt CM, Weber SM, Bentrem DJ, Gillespie TW, et al. A multicenter analysis of distal pancreatectomy for adenocarcinoma: is laparoscopic resection appropriate? J Am Coll Surg. 2010;210(779-85):86-7.
Abu Hilal M, Hamdan M, Di Fabio F, Pearce NW, Johnson CD. Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a clinical and cost-effectiveness study. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:1670-4.
Nakamura M, Wakabayashi G, Miyasaka Y, Tanaka M, Morikawa T, Unno M, et al. Multicenter comparative study of laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy using propensity score-matching. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2015;22:731-6.
de Rooij T, van Hilst J, van Santvoort H, Boerma D, van den Boezem P, Daams F, et al. Minimally Invasive Versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy (LEOPARD): a multicenter patient-blinded randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2019;269:2-9.
Asbun HJ, Van Hilst J, Tsamalaidze L, Kawaguchi Y, Sanford D, Pereira L, et al. Technique and audited outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy combining the clockwise approach, progressive stepwise compression technique, and staple line reinforcement. Surg Endosc. 2020;34:231-9.
Ohtsuka T, Nagakawa Y, Toyama H, Takeda Y, Maeda A, Kumamoto Y, et al. A multicenter prospective registration study on laparoscopic pancreatectomy in Japan: report on the assessment of 1,429 patients. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2020;27:47-55.
Palanivelu C, Rajan PS, Rangarajan M, Vaithiswaran V, Senthilnathan P, Parthasarathi R, et al. Evolution in techniques of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a decade long experience from a tertiary center. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2009;16:731-40.
Kendrick ML, Cusati D. Total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: feasibility and outcome in an early experience. Arch Surg. 2010;145:19-23.
Asbun HJ, Stauffer JA. Laparoscopic vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy: overall outcomes and severity of complications using the Accordion Severity Grading System. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;215:810-9.
Boggi U, Signori S, De Lio N, Perrone VG, Vistoli F, Belluomini M, et al. Feasibility of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg. 2013;100:917-25.
Nagakawa Y, Hosokawa Y, Sahara Y, Takishita C, Nakajima T, Hijikata Y, et al. A novel "artery first" approach allowing safe resection in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: The uncinate process first approach. Hepatogastroenterology. 2015;62:1037-40.
Liu R, Zhang T, Zhao ZM, Tan XL, Zhao GD, Zhang X, et al. The surgical outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary neoplasms: a comparative study of a single center. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:2380-6.
Nakamura M, Wakabayashi G, Tsuchida A, Nagakawa Y. Precision anatomy for minimally invasive hepatobiliary pancreatic surgery: PAM-HBP Surgery Project. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhbp.885
SIGN 50: A guideline developer’s handbook. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). Revised version was published in November, 2019. https://www.sign.ac.uk/media/1050/sign50_2019.pdf
Nishino H, Zimmitti G, Ohtsuka T, Abu Hilal M, Goh BKP, Kooby DA, et al. Precision vascular anatomy for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhbp.903
Ban D, Garbarino GM, Ishikawa Y, Honda G, Jang JY, Kang CM, et al. Surgical approaches for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhbp.902
Ishikawa Y, Ban D, Watanabe S, Akahoshi K, Ono H, Mitsunori Y, et al. Splenic artery as a simple landmark indicating difficulty during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. Asian J Endosc Surg. 2019;12:81-7.
Nakata K, Ohtsuka T, Miyasaka Y, Watanabe Y, Ideno N, Mori Y, et al. Evaluation of relationship between splenic artery and pancreatic parenchyma using three-dimensional computed tomography for laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2021;406:1885-92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-021-02101-3
Warshaw AL. Conservation of the spleen with distal pancreatectomy. Arch Surg. 1988;123:550-3.
Kimura W, Inoue T, Futakawa N, Shinkai H, Han I, Muto T. Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with conservation of the splenic artery and vein. Surgery. 1996;120:885-90.
Miura F, Takada T, Asano T, Kenmochi T, Ochiai T, Amano H, et al. Hemodynamic changes of splenogastric circulation after spleen-preserving pancreatectomy with excision of splenic artery and vein. Surgery. 2005;138:518-22.
Tien YW, Liu KL, Hu RH, Wang HP, Chang KJ, Lee PH. Risk of varices bleeding after spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with excision of splenic artery and vein. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:2193-8.
Romero-Torres R. The true splenic blood supply and its surgical applications. Hepatogastroenterology. 1998;45:885-8.
Egorov VI, Yashina NI, Zhurenkova TV, Petukhova MV, Starostina NS, Zarinskaya SA, et al. Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with resection of the splenic vessels. Should one rely on the short gastric arteries? J Pancreas. 2011;12:445-57.
Warshaw AL. Distal pancreatectomy with preservation of the spleen. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2010;17:808-12.
Fernández-Cruz L, Martínez I, Gilabert R, Cesar-Borges G, Astudillo E, Navarro S. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy combined with preservation of the spleen for cystic neoplasms of the pancreas. J Gastrointest Surg. 2004;8:493-501.
Asbun HJ, Stauffer JA. Laparoscopic approach to distal and subtotal pancreatectomy: a clockwise technique. Surg Endosc. 2011;25:2643-9.
Abu Hilal M, Richardson JR, de Rooij T, Dimovska E, Al-Saati H, Besselink MG. Laparoscopic radical 'no-touch' left pancreatosplenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: technique and results. Surg Endosc. 2016;30:3830-8.
Inoko K, Ebihara Y, Sakamoto K, Miyamoto N, Kurashima Y, Tamoto E, et al. Strategic approach to the splenic artery in laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2015;25:e122-5.
Takaori K, Uemoto S. Artery-first distal pancreatectomy. Dig Surg. 2016;33:314-9.
Morikawa T, Ishida M, Takadate T, Hata T, Iseki M, Kawaguchi K, et al. The superior approach with the stomach roll-up technique improves intraoperative outcomes and facilitates learning laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a comparative study between the superior and inferior approach. Surg Today. 2020;50:153-62.
Ome Y, Seyama Y, Doi M, Muto J. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for left-sided pancreatic cancer using the “caudo-dorsal artery first approach”. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26:4464-5.
Mabrut JY, Fernandez-Cruz L, Azagra JS, Bassi C, Delvaux G, Weerts J, et al. Laparoscopic pancreatic resection: results of a multicenter European study of 127 patients. Surgery. 2005;137:597-605.
Han HS, Min SK, Lee HK, Kim SW, Park YH. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with preservation of the spleen and splenic vessels for benign pancreas neoplasm. Surg Endosc. 2005;19:1367-9.
Melotti G, Butturini G, Piccoli M, Casetti L, Bassi C, Mullineris B, et al. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: results on a consecutive series of 58 patients. Ann Surg. 2007;246:77-82.
Nakamura Y, Matsushita A, Mizuguchi Y, Katsuno A, Uchida E. Study on laparoscopic spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy procedures comparing splenic vessel preservation and non-preservation. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;1:27.
Elabbasy F, Gadde R, Hanna MM, Sleeman D, Livingstone A, Yakoub D. Minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: does splenic vessel preservation have better postoperative outcomes? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2015;14:346-53.
Nakata K, Shikata S, Ohtsuka T, Ukai T, Miyasaka Y, Mori Y, et al. Minimally invasive preservation versus splenectomy during distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2018;25:476-88.
Wang L, Wu D, Cheng YG, Xu JW, Chu HB, Zhang GY, et al. Warshaw technique in laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: surgical strategy and late outcomes of splenic preservation. Biomed Res Int. 2019;2019:4074369.
Ome Y, Hashida K, Yokota M, Nagahisa Y, Michio O, Kawamoto K. Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for left-sided pancreatic cancer using the ligament of Treitz approach. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:4836-7.
Nishino H, Nagakawa Y, Takishita C, Kozono S, Osakabe H, Nakagawa N, et al. Safe exposure of the left renal vein during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: anatomical variations and pitfalls. Surg Today. 2020;50:1664-71.
Gagner M, Pomp A, Herrera MF. Early experience with laparoscopic resections of islet cell tumors. Surgery. 1996;120:1051-4.
Giulianotti PC, Coratti A, Angelini M, Sbrana F, Cecconi S, Balestracci T, et al. Robotics in general surgery: personal experience in a large community hospital. Arch Surg. 2003;138:777-84.
Strasberg SM, Linehan DC, Hawkins WG. Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy procedure for adenocarcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas: ability to obtain negative tangential margins. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:244-9.
Kawaguchi Y, Fuks D, Nomi T, Levard H, Gayet B. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy employing radical en bloc procedure for adenocarcinoma: technical details and outcomes. Surgery. 2015;157:1106-12.
Lee SH, Kang CM, Hwang HK, Choi SH, Lee WJ, Chi HS. Minimally invasive RAMPS in well-selected left-sided pancreatic cancer within Yonsei criteria: long-term (>median 3 years) oncologic outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2014;28:2848-55.
Kim S, Yoon YS, Han HS, Cho JY. Laparoscopic subtotal pancreatectomy with radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for left-sided pancreatic cancer. Surg Oncol. 2019;28:150.
Grossman JG, Fields RC, Hawkins WG, Strasberg SM. Single institution results of radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for adenocarcinoma of the body and tail of pancreas in 78 patients. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2016;23:432-41.