JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Laparoscopic Splenectomy and Azygoportal Disconnection: a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Given the technical difficulty of laparoscopic splenectomy and azygoportal disconnection (LSD), data are limited that compare the laparoscopic to the open procedure. As the technique becomes more widespread, questions regarding its safety, feasibility, and reproducibility must be addressed. This review assesses the current status of LSD.

METHODS: We conducted our literature review with a search of the PubMed database. All published series of 5 or more laparoscopic splenectomy and azygoportal disconnection procedures were examined. The demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative data analyzed included number of ports, conversion rate, operative duration, estimated intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and complications.

RESULTS: Fifteen articles met the review criteria. Of 412 laparoscopic procedures, traditional laparoscopic splenectomy and azygoportal disconnection (TLSD) was used in 322 patients (78.2%), a modified laparoscopic procedure (MLSD) in 79 (19.2%), and a single-incision laparoscopic procedure (SLSD) in 11 (2.7%). Compared with the traditional and single-incision laparoscopic procedures, the MLSD procedure was associated with shorter operative duration and less blood loss. Furthermore, although the incidence of postoperative portal vein system thrombosis was higher in the laparoscopic than in the open splenectomy with azygoportal disconnection (OSD) procedure, the LSD procedure was associated with less pulmonary infection and pleural effusion and fewer incisional and overall complications than the open procedure. The rate of conversion to an open procedure was 5.4%.

CONCLUSIONS: LSD is feasible and safe for selected patients when performed by an expert laparoscopic surgeon. It has perioperative advantages over OSD, but studies with longer follow-up periods and larger samples of patients are needed.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app