A retrospective comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic distal resection and enucleation for potentially benign pancreatic neoplasms.

PURPOSE: The present study aimed to compare robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic distal pancreatic resection and enucleation for potentially benign pancreatic neoplasms. METHODS: Patients were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. Demographic data, tumor types, and the perioperative outcomes were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: In a 10-year period, 75 patients (female, n = 44; male, n = 31; median age, 53 years [range, 9-84 years]) were identified. The majority of patients had pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (n = 39, 52%) and cystic neoplasms (n = 23, 31%) with a median tumor size of 17 (3-60) mm. Nineteen (25.3%) patients underwent enucleation (robotic, n = 11; laparoscopic, n = 8) and 56 (74.7%) patients underwent distal pancreatic resection (robotic, n = 24; laparoscopic, n = 32), of those 48 (85%) underwent spleen-preserving procedures. Eight (10.7%) procedures had to be converted to open surgery. The rate of vessel preservation in distal pancreatectomy was significantly higher in robotic-assisted procedures (62.5% vs. 12.5%, p = 0.01). Twenty-six (34.6%) patients experienced postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade > 3). Twenty (26.7%) patients developed a pancreatic fistula type B. There was no mortality. After a median follow-up period of 58 months (range 2-120 months), one patient (1.3%) developed local recurrence (glucagonoma) after enucleation, which was treated with a Whipple procedure. CONCLUSION: The robotic approach is comparably safe, but increases the rate of splenic vessel preservation and reduces the risk of conversion to open surgery.

Preoperative Imaging Overestimates the Tumor Size in Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms Associated with Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Type 1.

BACKGROUND: Radiological tumor size of non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (Nf-pNENs) associated with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) is a crucial parameter to indicate surgery. The aim of this study was to compare radiological size (RS) and pathologic size (PS) of MEN1 associated with pNENs. METHODS: Prospectively collected data of MEN1 patients who underwent pancreatic resections for pNENs were retrospectively analyzed. RS was defined as the largest tumor diameter measured on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT). PS was defined as the largest tumor diameter on pathological analysis. Student's t test and linear regression analysis were used to compare the median RS and PS. p < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Forty-four patients with a median age of 37 (range 10-68) years underwent primary pancreatic resections for pNENs. Overall, the median RS (20 mm, range 3-100 mm) was significantly larger than the PS (13 mm, range 4-110 mm) (p = 0.001). In patients with pNENs < 20 mm (n = 27), the size difference (median RS 15 mm vs PS 12 mm) was also significant (p = 0.003). However, the only modality that significantly overestimated the PS was EUS (median RS 14 mm vs 11 mm; p = 0.0002). RS overestimated the PS in 21 patients (21 of 27 patients, 78%). Five of 11 patients (12%) with a Nf-pNEN and a RS > 20 mm had in reality a PS < 20 mm. MRI was the imaging technique that best correlated with PS in the total cohort (r = 0.8; p < 0.0001), whereas EUS was the best correlating imaging tool in pNENs < 20 mm (r = 0.5; p = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Preoperative imaging, especially EUS, frequently overestimates the size of MEN1-pNENs, especially those with a PS < 20 mm. This should be considered when indicating surgery in MEN1 patients with small Nf-pNENs.

Does an ulnar styloid fracture interfere with the results of a distal radius fracture?

BACKGROUND: The ulnar styloid is a supportive structure for the capsular ligament complex of the distal radioulnar joint. The relation between fractures of the ulna and distal radius is not clear, especially in regard to whether ulnar fractures predict worse outcomes for distal radius fractures. The objective of this study was to analyze the influence of ulnar styloid fractures in patients with reducible and unstable distal radius fractures. METHODS: A total of 100 patients with unstable and reducible distal radius fractures, with or without an ulnar styloid fracture, were randomly assigned to treatment with transarticular bridging external fixation or transulnar percutaneous pinning. Follow-up was obtained for 91 patients. For the secondary data analysis, three patient cohorts were created: a no ulnar styloid fracture group with the radius fracture treated by pinning or external fixation (n = 30); an ulnar styloid fracture with radius fracture group treated by external fixation (n = 31); and an ulnar styloid fracture with radius fracture treated by pinning (n = 30). Functional and radiological outcomes were measured at 6 and 24 months. Functional outcome measures included wrist pain (visual analogue scale) and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. RESULTS: At 24 months, patients with both fractures had worse wrist pain and worse scores on the DASH questionnaire than the patients with an isolated distal radius fracture; and those treated by pinning had less wrist pain and showed better scores on the DASH questionnaire than the patients treated by fixation. CONCLUSIONS: Ulnar styloid fracture may be a predictive factor of worse functional outcome for distal radius fracture. Pinning and above-the-elbow casting, used to treat ulnar styloid fractures, led to better function than fixation.