Laparoscopic Pancreatic Head Preserving Total Duodenectomy: The Parenchymal Sparing Alternative to a Whipple.

BACKGROUND: When endoscopic options fail, laparoscopic pancreatic head-preserving duodenectomy (LPHPD) for benign duodenal lesions is a parenchymal sparing and safe alternative to a pancreaticoduodenectomy.1-3 LPHPD may be the optimal "amount" of surgery, because such lesions are at risk for undertreatment (partial endoscopic resection associated with recurrence) or overtreatment (Whipple associated with morbidity and loss of pancreatic parenchyma).4,5 PATIENT: A 80-year-old, healthy female patient was diagnosed endoscopically with two, flat, symptomatic adenomas (7-cm D2; 2-cm D3). She had no family history of polyposis. Germline testing, tumor markers, and colonoscopy did not show any abnormality. TECHNIQUE: With the patient in French position, a wide laparoscopic Kocherization was performed past IVC and aorta. Following prepyloric gastric transection, the entire duodenum was carefully dissected off the pancreas. After transection of the proximal jejunum, the reconstruction begins. A two-layer, duct-to-mucosa, ampullary-jejunal anastomosis and a type II Billroth gastrojejunostomy were performed. CONCLUSIONS: LPHPD avoids under- or overtreatment of benign duodenal lesions unamenable to an endoscopic approach. If the stepwise approach described in this video is followed, LPHPD represents a safe and parenchymal-sparing alternative to pancreaticoduodenectomy for benign duodenal lesions with reduced morbidity.

Laparoscopic Segment 1 with Partial IVC Resection in Advanced Cirrhosis: How to Do It Safely.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic versus open hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) resection reduces morbidity without a compromise in oncologic safety.1-4 Moreover, in the subgroup of cirrhotic patients, a decreased risk of prolonged postoperative ascites and liver decompensation has been reported.5-7 METHODS: A 54-year-old homeless, deaf male with chronic alcoholism, hepatitis C, and advanced cirrhosis was referred with a caudate tumor from a critical access hospital. Imaging showed a 3.6-cm HCC in the caudate lobe compressing the inferior vena cava (IVC). With the patient in reversed, modified French position, the liver was mobilized, and the hepatocaval space dissected. Portal and short hepatic vein branches were individually controlled, and the caudate lobe was dissected off the IVC. At the superior portion of the Spiegel process, the tumor was inseparable from the IVC, necessitating en bloc segment 1 with partial IVC resection. The IVC was reconstructed laparoscopically following a preplanned approach. The pathology report confirmed R0 resection of a moderately differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma without microvascular or perineural invasion (pT1bN0M0). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic caudate lobectomy for cirrhotic patients with partial IVC resection is technically demanding. It therefore requires a strategic and preplanned approach with dedicated instrumentation and laparoscopic skills available. Although the caudal view along the axis of the IVC facilitates dissection, a laparoscopic approach necessitates particular attention to central venous pressure management (intravenous fluid and respiratory tidal volume), meticulous control of portal and short hepatic vein branches, and availability of specialty laparoscopic instrumentation to ensure procedural safety.