ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is associated with less blood loss and faster functional recovery. However, the benefits of robotic assisted distal pancreatectomy (RDP) over laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) are unknown. AIMS: To compare RDP versus LDP for surgical treatment of benign lesions, pre-malignant and borderline malignant pancreatic neoplasias. METHODS: This is a retrospective study comparing LDP with RDP. Main outcomes were overall morbidity and overall costs. Secondary outcomes were pancreatic fistula (PF), infectious complications, readmission, operative time (OT) and length of hospital stay (LOS). RESULTS: Thirty patients submitted to LDP and 29 submitted to RDP were included in the study. There was no difference regarding preoperative characteristics. There was no difference regarding overall complications (RDP – 72,4% versus LDP – 80%, p=0,49). Costs were superior for patients submitted to RDP (RDP=US$ 6,688 versus LDP=US$ 6,149, p=0,02), mostly due to higher costs of surgical materials (RDP=US$ 2,364 versus LDP=1,421, p=0,00005). Twenty-one patients submitted to RDP and 24 to LDP developed pancreatic fistula (PF), but only 4 RDP and 7 LDP experienced infectious complications associated with PF. OT (RDP=224 min. versus LDP=213 min., p=0.36) was similar, as well as conversion to open procedure (1 RDP and 2 LDP). CONCLUSIONS: The postoperative morbidity of robotic distal pancreatectomy is comparable to laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. However, the costs of robotic distal pancreatectomy are slightly higher.

RESUMO RACIONAL: A pancreatectomia distal minimamente invasiva (PDMI) está associada a menos perda sanguínea e recuperação funcional mais rápida, no entanto, os benefícios da pancreatectomia distal robótica (PDR) são desconhecidos quando comparada a pancreatectomia distal laparoscópica (PDL). OBJETIVOS: Comparar PDR versus PDL no tratamento cirúrgico de lesões benignas, neoplasias pancreáticas malignas, pré-malignas e limítrofes. MÉTODOS: Estudo retrospectivo comparando PDL com PDR. Os desfechos primários avaliados foram morbidade e custos hospitalares. Os desfechos secundários foram fístula pancreática (FP), complicações infecciosas, readmissão, tempo cirúrgico e tempo de internação hospitalar (TIH). RESULTADOS: Trinta pacientes submetidos a PDL e 29 submetidos a PDR foram incluídos no estudo. Não houve diferença em relação às características pré-operatórias. Não houve diferença em relação às complicações gerais (PDL – 72,4% versus PRD – 80%, p=0,49). Os custos foram superiores para PDR (PDR=US$ 6688 versus PDL=US$ 6149, p=0,02), principalmente devido aos custos mais elevados de materiais cirúrgicos (PDR=US$ 2364 versus PDL=1421, p=0,00005). Vinte e um pacientes submetidos a PDR e 24 submetidos a PDL desenvolveram fístula pancreática (PF), no entanto, apenas 4 submetidos PDR e 7 a PDL apresentaram complicações infecciosas associadas a FP. O tempo cirúrgico (PDR=224 min. versus PDL=213 min., p=0,36) e a conversão para cirurgia aberta (1 PDR e 2 PDL) não tiveram diferença estatística. CONCLUSÕES: A morbidade pós operatória da pancreatectomia distal robótica é comparável à pancreatectomia distal laparoscópica. Entretando, os custos da pancreatectomia distal robótica são mais elevados.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prognostic significance of microvessel density and p53 expression in pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Between 2008 and 2012, 49 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma underwent resection with curative intention. The resected specimens were immunohistochemically stained with anti-p53 and anti-CD34 antibodies. Microvessel density was assessed by counting vessels within ten areas of each tumoral section a highpower microscope. RESULTS: The microvessel density ranged from 21.2 to 54.2 vessels/mm2. Positive nuclear staining for p53 was found in 20 patients (40.6%). The overall median survival rate after resection was 24.1 months and there were no differences in survival rates related to microvessel density or p53 positivity. Microvessel density was associated with tumor diameter greater than 3.0 cm and with R0 resection failure. CONCLUSIONS: Microvessel density was associated with R1 resection and with larger tumors. p53 expression was not correlated with intratumoral microvessel density in pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

RESUMO Racional: Tumores sólidos pseudopapilíferos do pâncreas são em geral massas circunscritas, com componentes sólidos e císticos, mais frequentemente encontrados em mulheres jovens. Na maioria dos casos, são neoplasias benignas e portanto, a abordagem minimamente invasiva pode ser considerada vantajosa. Objetivo: Avaliar os resultados das pancreatectomias laparoscópicas em pacientes com esses tumores. Métodos: Foram avaliados pacientes submetidos à pancreatectomias minimamente invasivas em um única instituição. Foram analisadas variáveis demográficas, clinicopatológicas, complicações pós-operatórias e sobrevida. Resultados: Todos os pacientes eram mulheres e a idade mediana foi de 39 (18-54) anos. Duas pacientes com tumores na cabeça do pâncreas foram submetidas à duodenopancreatectomia e outra à enucleação. Duas pacientes com tumores no colo do pâncreas realizaram pancreatectomia central. Outras cinco com neoplasias no corpo e cauda foram submetidas à pancreatectomia distal, uma delas com preservação do baço. Nenhuma necessitou de conversão para laparotomia. Houve duas fístulas pancreáticas clinicamente relevantes (20%). O tempo mediano de internação foi de cinco (2 a 8) dias e duas pacientes foram reinternadas (20%). Todas as margens de ressecção foram negativas e após seguimento mediano de 38 (14-71) semanas, todas estavam livres de doença. Conclusão: As ressecções pancreáticas minimamente invasivas de tumores sólidos pseudopapilíferos são factíveis para tumores em diferentes localizações no pâncreas, com morbidade aceitável obedecendo-se os princípios oncológicos para o tratamento dessas neoplasias.

ABSTRACT Background: Solid pseudopapillary pancreatic neoplasia is usually a large well-circumscribed pancreatic mass, with cystic and solid areas more frequently found in young women. It is a benign pancreatic neoplasia in most cases, therefore minimally invasive surgery could be an interesting approach. Aim: Evaluate the results of minimally invasive surgery for this neoplasia. Methods: Patients with this tumor who underwent minimally invasive pancreatectomies between 2009 and 2015 in a single institution, were analyzed regarding demographic, clinical-pathological futures, post-operative morbidity and disease-free survival. Results: All were women, and their median age was 39 (18-54) years. Two patients with tumor in the head of the pancreas underwent laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy, and another one underwent laparoscopic enucleation. Two patients with tumor in the neck underwent central pancreatectomy. Distal pancreatectomies were performed in the other five, one with splenic preservation. None required blood transfusion or conversion to open surgery. Two (20%) developed clinical relevant pancreatic fistulas, requiring readmission. Median length of postoperative hospital stay was five days (2-8). All resection margins were negative. Patients were followed for a median of 38 months (14-71), and there was no recurrence. Conclusions: Minimally invasive surgery for solid pseudopapillary pancreatic neoplasia is feasible for tumors in different locations in the pancreas. It was associated with acceptable morbidity and respected the oncologic principles for treatment.