The extent of the distal pancreatectomy determines the surgical risk
Cándido Alcazar,Jose M. Ramia
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/gs-23-511
2024-04-27
Gland Surgery
Abstract:Cándido Alcazar 1,2 , Jose M. Ramia 1,2,3 1 Department of Surgery, General Hospital Dr. Balmis, Alicante, Spain; 2 Alicante Institute for Health and Biomedical Research (ISABIAL), Alicante, Spain; 3 Department of Pathology and Surgery, Miguel Hernandez University, Alicante, Spain Comment on: Loos M, Mack CE, Xu ATL, et al . Distal Pancreatectomy: Extent of Resection Determines Surgical Risk Categories. Ann Surg 2024;279:479-85. Keywords: Distal pancreatectomy (DP); outcomes; surgery; pancreas Submitted Dec 14, 2023. Accepted for publication Feb 27, 2024. Published online Apr 22, 2024. doi: 10.21037/gs-23-511 We are going to comment on the excellent article by the Heidelberg University Hospital group entitled "Distal pancreatectomy: Extent of resection determines surgical risk categories" (1). The article is based on two previous articles published by this group (2,3), dedicated to the different results obtained when pancreatoduodenectomy and total pancreatectomy are categorized into different complexity groups, and distal pancreatectomies (DP) are classified according to complexity (1). However, as the authors of the manuscript describe, not all DP are the same. A standard DP, understood as the resection of the body/tail of the pancreas with splenectomy or not, is not the same as a DP with vascular resection (venous or arterial) or with resection of other organs. These procedures have different surgical complexity that usually leads to an increase in postoperative morbidity and mortality (4). Therefore, a new classification of the different techniques would allow a better definition of the results. The classification of DP proposed in the manuscript is clear and simple. Authors divided DP into four groups of increasing complexity: standard DP with or without splenectomy (type 1), DP associated with portal vein resection/superior mesenteric and/or resection of the left renal vein (type 2), DP with resection of an organ other than the spleen (type 3) and DP associated with major arterial resection other than the splenic artery (type 4) (1). We believe this classification improves the one proposed by Hartwig et al. in 2014 (5). We believe that it could be interesting to redefine more accurately the organ and the number of organs resected in type 3. A partial liver resection may not have the same complexity or implications in morbidity and mortality as a colonic resection with colon anastomosis. Thus, the authors show that major complications, the percentage of grade B–C pancreatic fistula, and the percentage of patients with type C bleeding are higher in type 2 DP than in type 3. Previous studies have shown that resection of more than two organs in pancreatic surgery is an independent factor in performing relaparotomy, and colonic resection shows a trend towards increasing reoperations (4,6). A remarkable fact is the long period of patient inclusion (October 2001 to December 2020). However, a long inclusion period may constitute a bias for the analysis of surgical morbidity and mortality since advances in technique surgery and perioperative management have been considerable in recent years (7). This long period has allowed them to study a huge number of patients because Heidelberg is one of the European centers with the highest volume of pancreatic surgery. As it has been demonstrated in previous publications, the volume of patients operated on by each center is essential for obtaining better outcomes (8). Among the advances, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is the most determinant. The MIS approach in distal pancreas resections is currently considered the "gold standard" technique (9). The MIS approach is superior to the open approach in terms of lower blood loss, lower incidence of delayed gastric emptying, shorter hospital stays, and less time to achieve functional recovery of the patient (10-12). We remember that the MIS approach includes both laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Pancreatic robotic surgery in recent years has seen an exponential increase and had achieved higher rates of splenic preservation, lower conversion rates, similar results in terms of oncology (R0 resections and number of lymph nodes resected) and post-surgical morbidity and mortality, with the drawback of increased costs (13). Perhaps in the not-too-distant future, when robotic costs decrease, we will witness the replacement of the laparoscopic approach by robotic surgery. Another remarkable fact is the low application of MIS technique in this manuscript (14.3%), especially in more straightforward cases like type 1. The implementation of pancreas MIS technique has been slower than in other organs, and as we commented before, the long recruitment period justifies the low percentage of MIS. Nowadays, the application of MIS in type 1 is near 60% in many seri -Abstract Truncated-
surgery