Surgical endoscopy · 2012
Revisiting vascular patency after spleen-preserving laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with conservation of splenic vessels.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hwang Ho Kyoung, Chung Young Eun, Kim Kyoung Ah, Kang Chang Moo, Lee Woo Jung
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: We evaluated vascular patency and potential changes in preserved spleens after laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) with conservation of both splenic vessels.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the patency of conserved splenic vessels in patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic splenic vessel-conserving SPDP from January 2006 to August 2010. The patency of the conserved splenic vessels was evaluated by abdominal computed tomography and classified into three grades according to the degree of severity.
RESULTS: Among 30 patients with splenic vessel-conserving laparoscopic SPDP, 29 patients with complete follow-up data were included in this study. During the follow-up period (median: 13.2 months), grades 1 and 2 splenic arterial obliteration were observed in one patient each. A total of five patients (17.2%) showed grade 1 or 2 obliteration in conserved splenic veins. Most patients (82.8%) had patent conserved splenic vein. Four patients (13.8%) eventually developed collateral venous vessels around gastric fundus and reserved spleen, but no spleen infarction was found, and none presented clinical relevant symptoms, such as variceal bleeding. There was no statistical difference in vascular patency between the laparoscopic and robotic groups (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Most patients showed intact vascular patency in conserved splenic vessels and no secondary changes in the preserved spleen after laparoscopic splenic vessel-conserving SPDP.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the patency of conserved splenic vessels in patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic splenic vessel-conserving SPDP from January 2006 to August 2010. The patency of the conserved splenic vessels was evaluated by abdominal computed tomography and classified into three grades according to the degree of severity.
RESULTS: Among 30 patients with splenic vessel-conserving laparoscopic SPDP, 29 patients with complete follow-up data were included in this study. During the follow-up period (median: 13.2 months), grades 1 and 2 splenic arterial obliteration were observed in one patient each. A total of five patients (17.2%) showed grade 1 or 2 obliteration in conserved splenic veins. Most patients (82.8%) had patent conserved splenic vein. Four patients (13.8%) eventually developed collateral venous vessels around gastric fundus and reserved spleen, but no spleen infarction was found, and none presented clinical relevant symptoms, such as variceal bleeding. There was no statistical difference in vascular patency between the laparoscopic and robotic groups (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Most patients showed intact vascular patency in conserved splenic vessels and no secondary changes in the preserved spleen after laparoscopic splenic vessel-conserving SPDP.