Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Surg Endosc ; 30(9): 3830-8, 2016 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26675941

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic left pancreatectomy has been well described for benign pancreatic lesions, but its role in pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains open to debate. We report our results adopting a laparoscopic technique that obeys established oncologic principles of open distal pancreatosplenectomy. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a prospectively kept database of 135 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic left pancreatectomy, performed across two sites in the UK and the Netherlands (07/2007-07/2015 Southampton and 10/2013-07/2015 Amsterdam). Primary outcomes were resection margin and lymph node retrieval. Secondary endpoints were other perioperative outcomes, including post-operative pancreatic fistula. Definition of radical resection was distance tumour to resection margin >1 mm. All patients underwent 'laparoscopic radical left pancreatosplenectomy' (LRLP) which involves 'hanging' the pancreas including Gerota's fascia, followed by clockwise dissection, including formal lymphadenectomy. RESULTS: LRLP for pancreatic adenocarcinoma was performed in 25 patients. Seven of the 25 patients (28 %) had extended resections, including the adrenal gland (n = 3), duodenojejunal flexure (n = 2) or transverse mesocolon (n = 3). Mean age was 68 years (54-81). Conversion rate was 0 %, mean operative time 240 min and mean blood loss 340 ml. Median intensive/high care and hospital stay were 1 and 5 days, respectively. Clavien-Dindo score 3+ complication rate was 12 % and ISGPF grade B/C pancreatic fistula rate 28 %; 90-day (or in-hospital) mortality was 0 %. The pancreatic resection margin was clear in all patients, and the posterior margin was involved (<1 mm) in 6 patients, meaning an overall R0 resection rate of 76 %. No resection margin was microscopically involved. Median nodal sample was 15 nodes (3-26). With an average follow-up of 17.2 months, 1-year survival was 88 %. CONCLUSIONS: A standardised laparoscopic approach to pancreatic adenocarcinoma in the left pancreas can be adopted safely. Our study shows that these results can be reproduced across multiple sites using the same technique.


Assuntos
Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirurgia , Laparoscopia , Pancreatectomia/métodos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Perda Sanguínea Cirúrgica , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/mortalidade , Feminino , Humanos , Tempo de Internação , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Países Baixos , Duração da Cirurgia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Estudos Prospectivos , Reino Unido
2.
World J Surg ; 38(12): 3175-80, 2014 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25138071

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Repeat laparoscopic liver resection (R-LLR) can be technically challenging. Data on this topic are scarce and many investigators would question its feasibility and outcomes. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety, feasibility, oncological efficiency and outcomes of R-LLR. METHODS: We reviewed a prospectively collected database of 403 patients undergoing 422 laparoscopic liver resections (LLRs) from August 2003 to August 2013. Data of 19 patients undergoing R-LLR were analyzed and compared to the primary resection (P-LLR) in these patients. Demographic and clinical data were studied. A subgroup analysis was done for minor resections. RESULTS: Twenty R-LLRs were performed in 19 patients (female 58 %; mean age: 57.5 years; age range: 23-79 years). Colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) were the commonest indication for R-LLR (60 %), followed by neuroendocrine tumor liver metastases (NETLM) (20 %) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (10 %). The majority (90 %) of resections were for malignant disease (18/20). There were three conversions (15 %), and two patients developed complications (10 %). The operative time (p = 0.005) and blood loss (p = 0.03) were both significantly greater in R-LLR compared to P-LLR, whereas length of stay (median 4 days; p = 0.30) and complications (p = 0.58) did not differ between the groups. R0 resection rates for P-LLR and R-LLR were 95 and 90 %, respectively (p = 0.73). CONCLUSIONS: Repeat LLR is safe, feasible, and can be performed with minimal morbidity. It appears to be technically more challenging than P-LLR, but without any increase in complications or length of hospital stay.


Assuntos
Carcinoma Hepatocelular/cirurgia , Neoplasias Colorretais/patologia , Hepatectomia , Laparoscopia , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundário , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirurgia , Tumores Neuroendócrinos/cirurgia , Adulto , Idoso , Perda Sanguínea Cirúrgica , Conversão para Cirurgia Aberta , Feminino , Hepatectomia/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Laparoscopia/efeitos adversos , Tempo de Internação , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Tumores Neuroendócrinos/secundário , Duração da Cirurgia , Reoperação , Estudos Retrospectivos , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA