Long-term outcomes after spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessels preservation or resection: A nationwide survey of the Japanese Society of Pancreatic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy is achieved by either splenic vessel resection or splenic vessel preservation. However, the long-term outcomes of spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection and spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel preservation are not well known. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection and spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel preservation. METHODS: The study included a total of 335 patients who underwent spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy during the study period and underwent computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging 3 and 5 years after surgery in the Japan Society of Pancreatic Surgery member institutions. We evaluated the diameter of the perigastric and gastric submucosal veins, patency of the splenic vessels, and splenic infarction. Preoperative backgrounds and short- and long-term outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Forty-four (13.1%) and 291 (86.9%) patients underwent spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection and spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel preservation, respectively. There were no significant differences in short-term outcomes between the 2 groups. Regarding long-term outcomes, the prevalence of perigastric varices was higher (P = .006), and platelet count was lower (P = .037) in the spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection group. However, other complications, such as gastric submucosal varices, postoperative splenic infarction, gastrointestinal bleeding, reoperation, postoperative splenectomy, and other hematologic parameters, were not significantly different between the 2 groups 5 years after surgery. In terms of the patency of splenic vessels in spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel preservation cases, partial or complete occlusion of the splenic artery and vein was observed 5 years after surgery in 19 (6.5%) and 55 (18.9%) patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: Perigastric varices and thrombocytopenia were observed more in spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection, yet late clinical events such as gastrointestinal bleeding and splenic infarction are acceptable for spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel preservation.

A Case Report of Modified Pancreatic Transplantation With a Limited Splenic Arteriovenous Fistula to Elude Thrombosis.

In classic pancreatic transplantation, the splenic artery and vein are ligated at the tail of the pancreas graft. This leads to slowed blood flow in the splenic vein and may cause thrombosis and graft loss. In this study, a patient received a pancreas after kidney transplantation. A modified surgical technique was used in the pancreatic graft preparation. The donor splenic artery and vein were anastomosed end to end at the tail of the pancreas. The splenic artery near the anastomosis was partially ligated, and an effective diameter of 2 mm was reserved to limit arterial blood pressure and flow. The patient recovered very well. Contrasted computed tomography scans on days 11 and 88 after pancreas transplantation indicated sufficient backflow of the splenic vein. We believe that this procedure may avoid the risk of splenic vein thrombosis after pancreas transplantation. This modified technique has not been reported in clinical cases previously and may help reduce the risk of thrombosis after pancreas transplantation.

Impact of radiological and pathological splenic vein involvement in patients with resectable pancreatic body or tail cancer.

PURPOSE: Several studies have reported a negative impact on survival associated with splenic vessel involvement, especially splenic artery (SpA) involvement, in patients diagnosed with pancreatic body or tail cancer. However, there is limited research on splenic vein (SpV) involvement. Therefore, we aimed to elucidate the significance of splenic vessel involvement, especially SpV involvement, in patients with resectable pancreatic body or tail cancer. METHODS: Between January 2007 and December 2021, 116 consecutive patients underwent distal pancreatectomies for pancreatic body or tail cancer. Among them, this study specifically examined 88 patients with resectable pancreatic body or tail cancer to elucidate prognostic factors using a multivariable Cox proportional analysis. The Kaplan-Meier method evaluated the impact of SpV involvement in terms of both radiological and pathological aspects and the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy. RESULTS: Higher pre-operative carcinoembryonic antigen levels, larger tumour size, pathological SpV invasion, and non-completion of adjuvant therapy were identified as independent poor prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Additionally, patients with radiological SpV encasement had significantly worse prognoses in terms of OS (p = 0.039) and RFS (p < 0.001). The sensitivity and specificity of multidetector-row computed tomography for detecting pathological SpV invasion were 81.0% and 61.2%, respectively. However, the prognostic impact of neoadjuvant therapy could not be determined, regardless of radiological SpV involvement. CONCLUSION: Radiological and pathological SpV involvement is a poor prognostic factor for patients with resectable pancreatic body or tail cancer. New innovative treatments and effective neoadjuvant therapy regimens are required for patients with SpV involvement.

Splenic vein tumor thrombosis is a major prognostic factor in distal pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of splenic vessel involvement in distal pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains controversial. The aim of the study was to assess its prognostic relevance in a large multicenter cohort. METHODS: Patients who underwent pancreatosplenectomy for distal pancreatic adenocarcinoma were identified from 5 pancreatic surgical centers. A pathology review of the surgical specimens was performed to assess splenic vessel involvement, defined as invasion of the vessel's adventitia or deeper, and confirm the presence of splenic vein tumor thrombosis. Prognostic factors associated with overall and relapse-free survival were evaluated. RESULTS: 149 patients underwent upfront surgery. Splenic vascular involvement was observed in 69 of them (46.3%). A parietal infiltration of the splenic artery or splenic vein was observed in 26 (17.5%) and 49 patients (32.8%), respectively. A pathologic tumor thrombosis of the splenic vein was identified in 22 patients (14.8%) and associated with larger tumors (>20 mm) (P = .023), more perineural (P = .017), and lymphovascular (P = .002) invasion, and more positive lymph node (P = .001). After a median follow-up of 50.8 months (95% confidence interval: 44.3-57.3), the cumulative 5-year overall and relapse-free survival were 46.2% and 33%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, in addition to lymph node metastasis (hazard ratio = 1.8; 95% confidence interval [1.1-3.1]; P = .023) and perineural invasion (hazard ratio = 3.5; 95% confidence interval [1.3-9.7]; P = .016), presence of splenic vein tumor thrombosis was the only splenic vascular involvement that affected independently the overall survival (HR = 2.3; 95% confidence interval [ 1.3-4.3]; P = .006). CONCLUSION: In resectable distal pancreatic adenocarcinoma, a pathologic tumor thrombosis of the splenic vein is an independent prognostic factor of overall survival. To define the perioperative oncological strategy, a preoperative evaluation of splenic vessel involvement and thrombosis is needed.

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: A novel technique with splenic artery resection and splenic vein preservation.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSDP) is widely performed to treat benign and low-grade malignant diseases. Although preservation of splenic vessels may be desirable considering the risk of postoperative complications, it is sometimes difficult due to tumor size, inflammation, and proximity of the tumor and splenic vessels. Herein, we present the first case of LSDP with splenic artery resection and splenic vein preservation. MATERIALS AND SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: A 40-year-old woman with a pancreatic tumor was referred to our hospital. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) revealed a tumor in the pancreatic tail that was in contact with the splenic artery and distant from the splenic vein. The splenic artery and vein were separated from the pancreas near the dissection line. The splenic artery was resected after pancreatic dissection using a linear stapler. After the pancreatic tail was separated from the splenic hilum while preserving the splenic vein, the distal side of the splenic artery was resected, and the specimen was removed. The postoperative course was uneventful and the patient was discharged on postoperative Day 9. Four months after surgery, postoperative follow-up CT findings showed neither splenic infarction nor gastric varices. DISCUSSION: This technique is an alternative method of splenic preservation when there is no attachment of the tumor to the splenic vein or uncontrolled expected bleeding of the splenic artery using the Kimura technique.

A case of Vp4 hepatocellular carcinoma with tumor thrombosis extending into the confluence of the splenic/portal vein achieved a good prognosis with emergent hepatectomy and postoperative adjuvant therapy with lenvatinib.

In this report, we describe a case of highly advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with tumor thrombosis extending into the main portal vein of the pancreas that was successfully treated with adjuvant lenvatinib after right hepatic resection with thrombectomy. A 70-year-old woman was referred from the clinic because of elevated hepatobiliary enzymes. The patient was positive for the hepatitis B virus antigen at our hospital. The tumor markers were highly elevated with alpha-fetoprotein (14.5 U/mL) and protein induced by vitamin K absence (PIVKAII) (1545 ng/mL), suggesting hepatocellular carcinoma. Dynamic abdominal computed tomography showed an early enhanced tumor approximately 6 cm in size and portal vein tumor thrombosis filling the main portal vein, but not extending into the splenic or superior mesenteric vein (SMV). On magnetic resonance imaging 1 week after CT, portal vein tumor thrombosis had extended to the confluence of the splenic vein with the SMV, indicating rapid tumor growth. Thus, we performed emergent right hepatectomy with tumor thrombectomy. Postoperatively, we treated the patient with lenvatinib for a tumor reduction surgery. Fortunately, the patient was alive 2 years postoperatively without recurrence. This case report suggests that a favorable outcome may be achieved with multidisciplinary treatment including resection and postoperative treatment with lenvatinib.

ANATOMICAL VARIATIONS OF PORTAL VENOUS SYSTEM: IMPORTANCE IN SURGICAL CLINIC.

AIM: Knowledge of the portal system and its anatomical variations aids to prevent surgical adverse events. The portal vein is usually made by the confluence of the superior mesenteric and splenic veins, together with their main tributaries, the inferior mesenteric, left gastric, and pancreaticoduodenal veins; however, anatomical variations are frequent. This article presents a literature review regarding previously described anatomical variations of the portal venous system and their frequency. METHODS: A systematic review of primary studies was performed in the databases PubMed, SciELO, BIREME, LILACS, Embase, ScienceDirect, and Scopus. Databases were searched for the following key terms: Anatomy, Portal vein, Mesenteric vein, Formation, Variation, Variant anatomic, Splenomesenteric vein, Splenic vein tributaries, and Confluence. RESULTS: We identified 12 variants of the portal venous bed, representing different unions of the splenic vein, superior mesenteric vein, and inferior mesenteric vein. Thomson classification of the end of 19th century refers to the three most frequent variants, with type I as predominant (M=47%), followed by type III (M=27.8%) and type II (M=18.6%). CONCLUSION: Thomson classification of variants is the most well-known, accounting for over 90% of portal venous variant found in clinical practice, inasmuch as the sum of the three junctions are found in over 93% of the patients. Even though rarer and accounting for less than 7% of variants, the other nine reported variations will occasionally be found during many abdominal operations.

Coincidence of splenic vein aneurysm and haemorrhagic cyst of the pancreas.

Pseudoaneurysm of the splenic vein is a rare entity which is associated with pancreatitis in 52 % cases. Pseudocysts of the pancreas create approximately 70 % of all cystic lesions of the pancreas. One of the most dangerous complications of pancreatic pseudocysts is bleeding into the cystic lumen. This is caused by perforation of the pseudoaneurysm of the splenic vein. Enzymatic damage of the splenic vein´s wall is the cause of pseudoaneurysm. The clinical condition varies. It can be asymptomatic or bring about haemodynamic instability. The diagnostic process of pseudoaneurysm of the splenic vein is difficult. This case study introduces a case of a 50­year­old man with the anamnesis of recurrent pancreatitis caused by alcoholism. He had abdominal pain and was diagnosed with a pseudocyst of the pancreas. Abdominal CT showed an extensive capsulated collection in the left subphrenic space, 23cm in diameter, with serosanguineous content and coagulations. The CT visualised the mass effect on the surrounding tissues and a complete deformation of the spleen. Between the collection and partially oppressed tail of the pancreas there was a venous pseudoaneurysm, 3.5cm in diameter. Considering its localization, it most probably originated from the splenic vein. Surgery was done. We did distal resection of the pancreas with a complete removal of the pseudocyst and spleen (Fig. 7, Ref. 11). Keywords: splenic vein, pseudoaneurysm, pancreatitis, pancreatic pseudocysts.

The clinical applicability of percutaneous splenic vein stent implantation for pancreatic portal hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic portal hypertension (PPH) is a type of extrahepatic portal hypertension. We compared the clinical efficacy of different treatment methods for PPH caused by splenic vein stenosis in chronic pancreatitis. METHODS: This article retrospectively analyzed the PPH cases that were caused by splenic vein stenosis after chronic pancreatitis. Patients were divided into three groups according to the different treatments: splenic vein stent implantation (stent group), splenectomy, and only medications (conservative group). The treatment effects from each group were compared. RESULTS: A total of 33 patients were retrospectively analyzed in this study (9, 12, and 12 patients in each group respectively). All the procedures were successful in the stent and splenectomy groups. During the follow-up, no patient had gastrointestinal bleeding recurrence in the stent and splenectomy groups. However, in the conservative group, the incidence of portal hypertensive gastropathy and upper gastrointestinal bleeding were 50% and 25%. In the stent group, all the varicose veins at the base of the stomach had shrunk by varying degrees, and the red color signs regressed. The stent patency rate was 100%. No major complication occurred. The average platelet count at 1, 3, 6-months postoperatively were all significantly higher than the preoperative value (P < 0.05). The average postoperative hospital stay duration was significantly shorter than that of the splenectomy group (3.1 ± 1.4 days vs. 16.1 ± 8.1 days; P < 0.05). In the splenectomy group, postoperative fever occurred in 4 patients. Postoperative infection occurred in 2 patients (one with abdominal cavity infection and the other with incision infection). Delayed abdominal bleeding occurred in one patient. Portal vein thrombosis occurred in 2 patients during follow up. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous splenic vein stent implantation for PPH treatment reduces the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding with minimal invasive. It has a high safety and reliable efficacy and is worthy of further clinical promotion.

Portal Perfusion Through the Splenic Vein During Liver Procurement.

OBJECTIVES: Livers procured via donation after cardiac death have produced good outcomes. Some centers use only aortic perfusion; others add portal perfusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We report a series of organ procurements in which portal perfusion was performed via cannulation of the splenic vein instead of the inferior mesenteric vein in 4 donors after cardiac death and 2 donors after brain death. RESULTS: After declaration of death, donors were brought to the operating room and prepared and draped. During procurement, first the aorta was cannulated, and then the atrium or inferior vena cava was opened and perfusion was started.The spleen was mobilized, the splenic vein was dissected out and cannulated, and portal perfusion was performed with 2 L of University of Wisconsin solution. Five liver allografts were transplanted: 3 at our center, and 2 at outside centers. One liver from a donor after cardiac death was declined because of a high fat content. All 5 transplanted grafts showed good initial function; there was no sign of primary nonfunction, and no vascular or biliary complications developed. CONCLUSIONS: For livers from donors after cardiac death, cannulation of the splenic vein was easier than access via the inferior mesenteric vein. For donors after brain death, we also found this technique was suitable for livers with intra-abdominal adhesions or a small inferior mesenteric vein. Graft outcomes in this series were excellent.

Splenorenal shunt for reconstruction of the gastric and splenic venous drainage during pancreatoduodenectomy with resection of the portal venous confluence.

BACKGROUND: Resection of the portal venous confluence is frequently necessary for radical resection during pancreatoduodenectomy for cancer. However, ligation of the splenic vein can cause serious postoperative complications such as gastric/splenic venous congestion and left-sided portal hypertension. A splenorenal shunt (SRS) can maintain gastric and splenic venous drainage and mitigate these complications. PURPOSE: This study describes the surgical technique, postoperative course, and surgical outcomes of SRS after pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS: Ten patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy and SRS between September 2017 and April 2019 were evaluated. After resection an end-to-side anastomosis between the splenic vein and the left renal vein was performed. Postoperative shunt patency, splenic volume, and any SRS-related complications were recorded. RESULTS: The rates of short- and long-term shunt patency were 100% and 60%, respectively. No procedure-associated complications were observed. No signs of left-sided portal hypertension, such as gastrointestinal bleeding or splenomegaly, and no gastric/splenic ischemia were observed in patients after SRS. CONCLUSION: SRS is a safe and effective measure to mitigate gastric congestion and left-sided portal hypertension after pancreatoduodenectomy with compromised gastric venous drainage after resection of the portal venous confluence.

Pancreaticoduodenectomy and Vascular Reconstruction: Indications and Techniques.

Pancreaticoduodenectomy with vascular resection/reconstruction can be safely completed following 6 standard steps plus basic principles of vascular surgery. Particular attention is paid to the location of the tumor relative to the 2 first-order vein branches, portal vein -splenic vein -superior mesenteric vein confluence, inferior mesenteric vein, and the presence of arterial perineural invasion. Successful resection following neoadjuvant therapy can result in median survival 3 times that of historical controls.

The Robotic Spleen Preserving Distal Pancreatectomy Under Temporary Splenic Artery Occlusion: the Royal North Shore Technique.

There are numerous advantages of splenic vessel preservation in performing the minimally invasive spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy. Dissection along the splenic artery, and a medial to lateral dissection of the splenic vein, is associated with high risk of injury and bleeding. Proximal control of the splenic artery with vessel loops, which require tightening or adjustment with the advent of distal bleeding, is inefficient. Instead, a modified technique (the Royal North Shore Technique), whereby a vascular clamp is placed on the splenic artery, reduces splenic artery inflow and indirectly, splenic vein returns. This allows for more accurate and injury-free dissection of the now non-distended splenic vein and the associated tributaries, and maintains a relatively bloodless field in the event of arterial injury.

Safety of Combined Division vs Separate Division of the Splenic Vein in Patients Undergoing Distal Pancreatectomy: A Noninferiority Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: In distal pancreatectomy (DP), the splenic vein is isolated from the pancreatic parenchyma prior to being ligated and divided to prevent intra-abdominal hemorrhage from the splenic vein stump with pancreatic fistula (PF). Conversely, dissecting the splenic vein with the pancreatic parenchyma is easy and time-saving. Objective: To establish the safety of combined division of the splenic vein compared with separate division of the splenic vein. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study was designed as a multicenter prospective randomized phase 3 trial. All results were analyzed using the modified intent-to-treat set. Patients undergoing DP for pancreatic body and tail tumors were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned between August 10, 2016, and July 30, 2019. Interventions: Patients were centrally randomized (1:1) to either separate division of the splenic vein or combined division of the splenic vein. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the incidence of grade B/C PF, and the incidence of intra-abdominal hemorrhage was included as one of the secondary end points. Results: A total of 318 patients were randomly assigned, and 2 patients were excluded as ineligible. Of the 316 remaining patients, 150 (50.3%) were male. The modified intent-to-treat population constituted 159 patients (50.3%) in the separate division group and 157 patients (49.7%) in the combined division group. In the modified intent-to-treat set, the proportion of grade B/C PF in the separate division group was 27.1% (42 of 155) vs 28.6% (44 of 154) in the combined division group (adjusted odds ratio, 1.108; 95% CI, 0.847-1.225; P = .047), demonstrating noninferiority of the combined division of the splenic vein against separate division. The incidence of postoperative intra-abdominal hemorrhage in the 2 groups was identical at 1.3%. Conclusions and Relevance: This study demonstrated noninferiority of the combined division of the splenic vein compared with separate division of the splenic vein regarding safety. Thus, isolating the splenic vein from the pancreatic parenchyma is deemed unnecessary. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02871804.

Percutaneous treatment of a splenorenal shunt with an atrial septal closure device.

We present the case of a 70-year-old female who underwent liver transplantation in 2011 due to enolic cirrhosis with a normofunction graft and no portal hypertension. During the last months, recurrent hospitalization was needed due to hepatic encephalopathy, in spite of treatment with lactulose and rifaximin. An abdominal computed tomography (CT) showed a large varicose dilatation of the splenic vein up to 14-16 mm, descending by the left abdominal side, communicating with the renal vein with direct drainage into inferior cava vein (ICV).

Direct splenic vein reconstruction combined with resection of the portal vein/superior mesenteric vein confluence during pancreaticoduodenectomy.

PURPOSE: Splenic vein (SV) ligation combined with portal vein (PV)/superior mesenteric vein (SMV) confluence resection during pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is reported to cause left-side portal hypertension (LPH). The purpose of this study was to present our technique of the SV reconstruction and to evaluate the surgical outcomes with/without SV ligation during PD. METHODS: Twenty-four patients undergoing PD with PV and/or SMV resection and being followed over 4 months after surgery between March 2013 and December 2019 in our hospital were evaluated. Resection of the PV/SMV confluence were performed in 14, and SV reconstruction was successfully performed in 3. Presence of LPH was assessed by examining changes in splenic volume, newly venous collateral formation, and platelet counts before and 4-8 months after PD. Surgical technique is the direct anastomosis between SV and PV. RESULTS: Splenic volume ratio was significantly higher in the SV ligation group (n = 11) than in the SV preservation group (n = 13) (median (range) 1.11 (0.57-1.62) vs. 1.68 (1.05-2.22), p < 0.01), but no significant differences were found in the incidence of newly formed venous collaterals or platelet counts between groups. CONCLUSION: SV ligation may represent the cause of LPH after PD combined with resection of PV/SMV confluence. Our simple procedure may help decrease the incidence of LPH.