Laparoscopic Donor Distal Pancreatectomy for Living Donor Pancreas and Pancreas–Kidney Transplantation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
American Journal of Transplantation 2005; 5: 1966–1970 Copyright C Blackwell Munksgaard 2005 Blackwell Munksgaard doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2005.00950.x Laparoscopic Donor Distal Pancreatectomy for Living Donor Pancreas and Pancreas–Kidney Transplantation Miguel Tan, Raja Kandaswamy, David ER high panel-reactive antibody (PRA) who is unlikely to re- ∗ Sutherland and Rainer WG Gruessner ceive a cadaver organ. Before 1994, our institution only of- fered an LD pancreas transplant as a pancreas transplant Department of Surgery, Division of Transplantation, alone (PTA) or as a pancreas after kidney (PAK) transplant, University of Minnesota, MN because of the fear that multiorgan retrieval from an LD ∗ Corresponding author: Rainer WG Gruessner, entailed too much morbidity (4). With that approach, how- [email protected] ever, diabetic uremic patients had to endure two separate procedures, which many patients were loath to undergo. With the proliferation and expanding applications of Even today, patients will sometimes pass up a single organ laparoscopic techniques, we determined the applica- in order to undergo a simultaneous pancreas–kidney (SPK) bility of the laparoscopic approach to living pancreas transplant despite its prolonged waiting time. donation. We performed the first laparoscopic donor distal pancreatectomy in 1999. We herein present our It has also been demonstrated that diabetic patients on initial experience with five hand-assisted laparoscopic dialysis have increased morbidity and mortality, as com- donor pancreatectomies. Three donors underwent dis- pared with nondiabetic patients on dialysis. Diabetic pa- tal pancreatectomy alone; two underwent a simultane- tients undergoing a kidney transplant alone (KTA) have a ± ous left nephrectomy. The mean donor age was 48.4 higher mortality rate as compared with those undergoing 8.7 years with a body mass index of 23.7 kg/m2. The an SPK transplant (5,6). donor and recipient survival rate was 100% at up to 3 years of follow-up. There were no episodes of pan- creatitis, leaks, or pseudocysts. All donors returned to Consequently, we now perform LD SPK transplants in se- their preoperative state of health and to work. None lected patients to alleviate prolonged waiting time and to of the donors have required oral anti-diabetic medica- decrease the morbidity and mortality of diabetics awaiting tions or insulin. We conclude that laparoscopic donor a transplant. distal pancreatectomy is a safe and efficient procedure; hand-assisted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy ap- Although the donor operation can be done safely, it is as- pears to be preferable, because of the added margin of sociated with postoperative morbidity related, in part, to safety from increased tactile feedback and ease of pan- the bilateral subcostal incision. The advent of laparoscopic creatic dissection. The procedure can be accomplished technology has offered an alternative to the open approach. with a single 6-cm periumbilical incision and only two 12-mm ports, resulting in excellent cosmesis and high Its viability has been demonstrated by laparoscopic donor donor satisfaction. nephrectomy, which has rapidly become the procedure of choice for kidney donation because of reduced hospital Key words: Laparoscopic pancreatectomy, living don- stay, decreased pain and more rapid convalescence (7,8). or, pancreas transplantation Cosmetically, laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is more ap- pealing to potential donors, as compared with the tradi- Received 28 October 2004, revised and accepted for tional flank incision required for open nephrectomy. It is publication 14 March 2005 equivalent to the open procedure in terms of donor safety and allograft quality (8). Introduction Laparoscopic techniques have rapidly been applied to other organ systems, including the pancreas. Laparoscopic dis- The pancreas was the first extrarenal organ to be success- tal pancreatectomies have been described for treatment fully used from living donors (LDs) (1). Yet, of the more of a variety of pathologic states. They appear to be safe, than 20 000 pancreas transplants performed since 1966, with the additional benefit of reduced hospital costs and fewer than 1% have come from LDs (2,3). Underuse of this accelerated postoperative recovery (9,10). resource can be attributed to concerns about the potential morbidity of an open distal pancreatectomy in an otherwise In an effort to decrease the morbidity associated with healthy donor. In selected cases, however, an LD pancreas open pancreas donation and to assess the applicability of transplant is an appropriate option, such as a recipient with this technology, we performed the first laparoscopic donor 1966 Laparoscopic Donor Pancreatectomy distal pancreatectomy in 1999. We herein present our ini- shears, laparoscopic scissors and other instruments. The surgeon and assis- tial experience with this procedure. tant stood on the donor’s left side. Mobilization of the left colon, the ureter and the left gonadal vein, as well as dissection of the kidney, is described elsewhere (12). Before ligation of the renal vessels, the donor was given Methods 70 units/kg of intravenous heparin, the effect of which was reversed with protamine sulfate (10 mg/1000 units heparin) after the vessels were ligated. Preoperative donor evaluation The renal artery was ligated with two Hem-o-lok clips (Weck Closure Sys- From March 1999 through August 2003, we performed five hand-assisted tems, Research Triangle Park, NC), then divided with laparoscopic scissors. laparoscopic donor pancreatectomies at the University of Minnesota. All The renal vein was ligated with a 35-mm vascular stapler (ETS Flex Enco- donors underwent an extensive multidisciplinary workup involving endocri- scopic Articulating Linear Cutter, Ethicon Endosurgery, Cincinnati, OH). The nologists, nephrologists, cardiologists, social service personnel, psychia- kidney was extracted by hand through the midline incision and passed off trists and transplant surgeons. Potential pancreas donors were only con- to the recipient surgical team. sidered if they fit the following criteria: body mass index (BMI) <27 kg/m2, insulin response to glucose or arginine >300% of basal insulin, HgbA1c The donor was then rotated to a supine position with reverse Trendelenburg <6%, basal insulin fasting levels <20 umol/L, plasma glucose <150 mg/L positioning. The inferior margin of the pancreas was completely mobilized during a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test and a glucose disposal rate >1% by using ultrasonic shears and electrocautery. The inferior mesenteric vein during an intravenous glucose tolerance test. In genetically related donors, (IMV) was identified, ligated with staples, and divided near its insertion into no other family members other than the recipient could be diabetic. A ge- the splenic vein. The tail of the pancreas was encircled with a finger: a hole netically related donor had to be at least 10 years older than the recipient was made in the avascular plane along the superior margin of the pancreatic was at the time of onset of diabetes in the recipient. Other contraindications tail and then a finger was passed along the underside of the pancreas. The to donation included a history of gestational diabetes and previous pancre- tail was encircled with a blue vessel loop, in order to facilitate atraumatic atic surgery or disorders. All potential donors during this time period that anterior retraction of the pancreas. The posterior surface of the pancreas met the aforementioned criteria were eligible for laparoscopic donation. No was freed from its retroperitoneal attachments by using electrocautery. The open procedures were performed. splenic artery and vein were identified in the hilum of the spleen and indi- vidually ligated and divided using a 35-mm vascular stapler. Care was taken Radiologic evaluation not to disturb the short gastric and right gastroepiploic vessels, because We evaluated each potential donor’s vascular anatomy to determine suit- they constituted the major remaining blood supply to the spleen. ability for pancreas donation. At our center, magnetic resonance angiogra- phy (MRA) is the modality of choice because of its noninvasive nature and With the pancreas mobilized medially, the splenic artery was mobilized just its ability to discern parenchymal details and to provide details of venous as it bifurcated off the celiac axis; likewise, the splenic vein was mobilized anatomy (11). Of interest is the anatomy of the splenic vessels, specifically circumferentially near its junction with the SMV (Figure 1). Before ligation the takeoff of the splenic artery and the location of the confluence of the of the vessels, heparin (30 units/kg) was administered. Protamine was ad- splenic vein and superior mesenteric vein (SMV). MRA also allows evalu- ministered after the vessels were divided. Two clips were applied to the ation of the location and number of renal vessels, in case a simultaneous splenic artery just distal to the celiac axis (Figure 2), then divided with la- nephrectomy is to be done. The decision to procure the left or right kidney paroscopic scissors. Two staples were applied to the splenic vein at the is made on a case-by-case basis according to the number and location of level of its junction with the SMV, and then divided. A 45-mm ETS Flex Lin- accessory renal vessels. Our preference, however, is to procure the left ear Articulating Stapler (Ethicon Endosurgery, Cincinnati, OH) was used to kidney, because of the longer renal vein and subsequent ease