Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Preoperative Evaluation and Anesthesia in Minimally Invasive Surgery of the Pancreas

  • Chapter
Minimally Invasive Surgery of the Pancreas

Part of the book series: Updates in Surgery ((UPDATESSURG))

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. van Hilst J, de Rooij T, Abu Hilal M et al (2017) Worldwide survey on opinions and use of minimally invasive pancreatic resection. HPB (Oxford) 19(3):190–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Gooiker GA, van Gijn W, Wouters MW et al (2011) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the volume-outcome relationship in pancreatic surgery. Br J Surg 98(4):485–494

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kendrick ML, van Hilst J, Boggi U et al (2017) Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy. HPB (Oxford) 19(3):215–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Vollmer CM, Asbun HJ, Barkun J et al (2017) Proceedings of the first international state-of-the-art conference on minimally-invasive pancreatic resection (MIPR). HPB (Oxford) 19(3):171–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Huang Y, Chua TC, Gill AJ, Samra JS (2017) Impact of perioperative fluid administration on early outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy: a meta-analysis. Pancreatology 17(3):334–341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bruns H, Kortendieck V, Raab HR, Antolovic D (2016) Intraoperative fluid excess is a risk factor for pancreatic fistula after partial pancreaticoduodenectomy. HPB Surg 2016:1601340 doi:10.1155/2016/1601340

    Google Scholar 

  7. Grant F, Brennan MF, Allen PJ et al (2016) Prospective randomized controlled trial of liberal vs restricted perioperative fluid management in patients undergoing pancreatectomy. Ann Surg 264(4):591–598

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Xiong J, Szatmary P, Huang W et al (2016) Enhanced recovery after surgery program in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy: a PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 95(18):e3497

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Joliat GR, Labgaa I, Petermann D et al (2015) Cost-benefit analysis of an enhanced recovery protocol for pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 102(13):1676–1683

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hamza N, Darwish A, O’Reilly DA et al (2015) Perioperative enteral immunonutrition modulates systemic and mucosal immunity and the inflammatory response in patients with periampullary cancer scheduled for pancreaticoduodenectomy: a randomized clinical trial. Pancreas 44(1):41–52

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ross A, Mohammed S, Vanburen G et al (2013) An assessment of the necessity of transfusion during pancreatoduodenectomy. Surgery 154(3):504–511

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Boggi U, Napoli N, Costa F et al (2016) Robotic-assisted pancreatic resections. World J Surg 40(10):2497–2506

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chalikonda S, Aguilar-Saavedra JR, Walsh RM (2012) Laparoscopic robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy: a case-matched comparison with open resection. Surg Endosc 26(9):2397–2402

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Petrowsky H, Clavien PA (2005) Should we deny surgery for malignant hepato-pancreaticobiliary tumors to elderly patients? World J Surg 29(9):1093–1100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mak PH, Campbell RC, Irwin MG; American Society of Anesthesiologists (2002) The ASA Physical Status Classification: inter-observer consistency. American Society of Anesthesiologists. Anaesth Intensive Care 30(5):633–640

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Tamijmarane A, Bhati CS, Mirza DF et al (2008) Application of Portsmouth modification of physiological and operative severity scoring system for enumeration of morbidity and mortality (P-POSSUM) in pancreatic surgery. World J Surg Oncol 6:39

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Ouellette JR, Small DG, Termuhlen PM (2004) Evaluation of Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index as predictor of morbidity and mortality in patients with colorectal carcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg 8(8):1061–1067

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. de Castro SM, Biere SS, Lagarde SM et al (2009) Validation of a nomogram for predicting survival after resection for adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. Br J Surg 96(4):417–423

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gulbinas A, Barauskas G, Pundzius J (2004) Preoperative stratification of pancreas-related morbidity after the Whipple procedure. Int Surg 89(1):39–45

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mogal H, Vermilion SA, Dodson R et al (2017) Modified frailty index predicts morbidity and mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 24(6):1714–1721

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Satava RM, Gallagher AG, Pellegrini CA (2003) Surgical competence and surgical proficiency: definitions, taxonomy, and metrics. J Am Coll Surg 196(6):933–937

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hogg ME, Besselink MG, Clavien PA et al (2017) Training in minimally invasive pancreatic resections: a paradigm shift away from “See one, Do one, Teach one”. HPB (Oxford) 19(3): 234–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Jepsen RM, Dieckmann P, Spanager L et al (2016) Evaluating structured assessment of anaesthesiologists’ non-technical skills. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 60(6):756–766

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gjeraa K, Jepsen RM, Rewers M et al (2016) Exploring the relationship between anaesthesiologists’ non-technical and technical skills. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 60(1):36–47

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Savonitto S, Caracciolo M, Cattaneo M, De Servi S (2011) Management of patients with recently implanted coronary stents on dual antiplatelet therapy who need to undergo major surgery. J Thromb Haemost 9(11):2133–2142

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wolf AM, Pucci MJ, Gabale SD et al (2014) Safety of perioperative aspirin therapy in pancreatic operations. Surgery 155(1):39–46

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mita K, Ito H, Takahashi K et al (2016) Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage after pancreatic surgery in patients receiving anticoagulation or antiplatelet agents. Surg Innov 23(3): 284–290

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Fujikawa T, Tanaka A, Abe T et al (2013) Does antiplatelet therapy affect outcomes of patients receiving abdominal laparoscopic surgery? Lessons from more than 1,000 laparoscopic operations in a single tertiary referral hospital. J Am Coll Surg 217(6):1044–1053

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Stark M, Pomati S, D’Ambrosio A et al (2015) A new telesurgical platform — preliminary clinical results. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 24(1):31–36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Rosenberg J, Fuchs-Buder T (2016) Why surgeons need to know about anaesthesia. Surg Endosc 30(9):3661–3664

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Christensen CR, Maatman TK, Maatman TJ, Tran TT (2016) Examining clinical outcomes utilizing low-pressure pneumoperitoneum during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Robot Surg 10(3):215–219

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Angioli R, Terranova C, Plotti F et al (2015) Influence of pneumoperitoneum pressure on surgical field during robotic and laparoscopic surgery: a comparative study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 291(4):865–868

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Gill A, Randell R (2016) Robotic surgery and its impact on teamwork in the operating theatre. J Perioper Pract 26(3):42–45

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Demyttenaere SV, Taqi A, Polyhronopoulos GN et al (2007) Targeting individual hemodynamics to maintain renal perfusion during pneumoperitoneum in a porcine model. Surgery 142(3):350–356

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Yavuz Y, Rønning K, Lyng O et al (2001) Effect of increased intraabdominal pressure on cardiac output and tissue blood flow assessed by color-labeled microspheres in the pig. Surg Endosc 15(2):149–155

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Galizia G, Prizio G, Lieto E et al (2001) Hemodynamic and pulmonary changes during open, carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum and abdominal wall-lifting cholecystectomy. A prospective, randomized study. Surg Endosc 15(5):477–483

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Odeberg S, Ljungqvist O, Svenberg T et al (1994) Haemodynamic effects of pneumoperitoneum and the influence of posture during anaesthesia for laparoscopic surgery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 38(3):276–283

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Crystal GJ (2015) Carbon dioxide and the heart: physiology and clinical implications. Anesth Analg 121(3):610–623

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Rauh R, Hemmerling TM, Rist M, Jacobi KE (2001) Influence of pneumoperitoneum and patient positioning on respiratory system compliance. J Clin Anesth 13(5):361–365

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Bures E, Fusciardi J, Lanquetot H et al (1996) Ventilatory effects of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 40(5):566–573

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Lebowitz P, Yedlin A, Hakimi AA et al (2015) Respiratory gas exchange during roboticassisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Clin Anesth 27(6):470–475

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Marik PE, Cavallazzi R (2013) Does the central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? An updated meta-analysis and a plea for some common sense. Crit Care Med 41(7):1774–1781

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Hahn RG, He R, Li Y (2016) Central venous pressure as an adjunct to flow-guided volume optimisation after induction of general anaesthesia. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther 48(2):110–115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Neudecker J, Sauerland S, Neugebauer E et al (2002) The European Association for Endoscopic Surgery clinical practice guideline on the pneumoperitoneum for laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 16(7):1121–1143

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Wulf H, Ledowski T, Linstedt U et al (1998) Neuromuscular blocking effects of rocuronium during desflurane, isofurane, and sevoflurane anaesthesia. Can J Anaesth 45(6):526–532

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Cantineau JP, Porte F, d’Honneur G, Duvaldestin P (1994) Neuromuscular effects of rocuronium on the diaphragm and adductor pollicis muscles in anesthetized patients. Anesthesiology 81(3):585–590

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Kirov K, Motamed C, Combes X et al (2000) Sensitivity to atracurium in the lateral abdominal muscles. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 19(10):734–738 [Article in French]

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Jones RK, Caldwell JE, Brull SJ, Soto RG (2008) Reversal of profound rocuronium-induced blockade with sugammadex: a randomized comparison with neostigmine. Anesthesiology 109(5):816–824

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Güldner A, Kiss T, Serpa Neto A et al (2015) Intraoperative protective mechanical ventilation for prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications: a comprehensive review of the role of tidal volume, positive end-expiratory pressure, and lung recruitment maneuvers. Anesthesiology 123(3):692–713

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Wang JP, Wang HB, Liu YJ et al (2015) Comparison of pressure- and volume-controlled ventilation in laparoscopic surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial. Clin Invest Med 38(3):E119–E141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Agrò FE, Cappa P, Sciuto SA, Silvestri S (2006) Linear model and algorithm to automatically estimate the pressure limit of pressure controlled ventilation for delivering a target tidal volume. J Clin Monit Comput 20(1):1–10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. De Pietri L, Montalti R, Begliomini B (2014) Anaesthetic perioperative management of patients with pancreatic cancer. World J Gastroenterol 20(9):2304–2320

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Husedzinović I, Tonković D, Barisin S et al (2003) Hemodynamic differences in sevoflurane versus propofol anesthesia. Coll Antropol 27(1):205–212

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Kanaya N, Hirata N, Kurosawa S et al (2003) Differential effects of propofol and sevoflurane on heart rate variability. Anesthesiology 98(1):34–40

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Lele E, Petak F, Fontao F et al (2006) Protective effects of volatile agents against acetylcholine-induced bronchoconstriction in isolated perfused rat lungs. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 50(9):1145–1151

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Goff MJ, Arain SR, Ficke DJ et al (2000) Absence of bronchodilation during desflurane anesthesia: a comparison to sevoflurane and thiopental. Anesthesiology 93(2):404–408

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Zhang L, Liao Q, Zhang T et al (2016) Blood transfusion is an independent risk factor for postoperative serious infectious complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy. World J Surg 40(10):2507–2512

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Fisher AV, Fernandes-Taylor S, Campbell-Flohr SA et al (2017) 30-day readmission after pancreatic resection: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Ann Surg [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000002230

    Google Scholar 

  59. Sutton JM, Kooby DA, Wilson GC et al (2014) Perioperative blood transfusion is associated with decreased survival in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a multi-institutional study. J Gastrointest Surg 18(9):1575–1587

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Carson JL, Noveck H, Berlin JA, Gould SA (2002) Mortality and morbidity in patients with very low postoperative Hb levels who decline blood transfusion. Transfusion 42(7):812–818

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Carson JL, Duff A, Poses RM et al (1996) Effect of anaemia and cardiovascular disease on surgical mortality and morbidity. Lancet 348(9034):1055–1060

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Nair D, Shlipak MG, Angeja B et al (2005) Association of anemia with diastolic dysfunction among patients with coronary artery disease in the Heart and Soul Study. Am J Cardiol 95(3):332–336

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Kim Y, Amini N, Gani F et al (2017) Age of transfused blood impacts perioperative outcomes among patients who undergo major gastrointestinal surgery. Ann Surg 265(1):103–110

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Barreto SG, Singh A, Perwaiz A et al (2017) Maximum surgical blood order schedule for pancreatoduodenectomy: a long way from uniform applicability! Future Oncol 13(9): 799–807

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Di Giorgio A, Alfieri S, Rotondi F et al (2005) Pancreatoduodenectomy for tumors of Vater’s ampulla: report on 94 consecutive patients. World J Surg 29(4):513–518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Spolverato G, Bagante F, Weiss M et al (2016) Impact of delta hemoglobin on provider transfusion practices and post-operative morbidity among patients undergoing liver and pancreatic surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 20(12):2010–2020

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Laaninen M, Sand J, Nordback I et al (2016) Perioperative hydrocortisone reduces major complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 264(5):696–702

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Gurusamy KS, Koti R, Fusai G, Davidson BR (2013) Somatostatin analogues for pancreatic surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 30:CD008370

    Google Scholar 

  69. McMillan MT, Soi S, Asbun HJ et al (2016) Risk-adjusted outcomes of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula following pancreatoduodenectomy: a model for performance evaluation. Ann Surg 264(2):344–352

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Zhou X, Wu MC, Wang YL et al (2013) Mannitol improves cerebral oxygen content and postoperative recovery after prolonged retroperitoneal laparoscopy. Surg Endosc 27(4):1166–1171

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Bolte SL, Chin LT, Moon TD et al (2006) Maintaining urine production and early allograft function during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Urology 68(4):747–750

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Morgan KA, Lancaster WP, Walters ML et al (2016) Enhanced recovery after surgery protocols are valuable in pancreas surgery patients. J Am Coll Surg 222(4):658–664

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy

    Gabriella Amorese

Authors
  1. Gabriella Amorese
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gabriella Amorese .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Translational Research and of New Surgical and Medical Technologies, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy

    Ugo Boggi

  2. Division of General and Transplant Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy

    Ugo Boggi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer-Verlag Italia S.r.l.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Amorese, G. (2018). Preoperative Evaluation and Anesthesia in Minimally Invasive Surgery of the Pancreas. In: Boggi, U. (eds) Minimally Invasive Surgery of the Pancreas. Updates in Surgery. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-3958-2_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-3958-2_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Milano

  • Print ISBN: 978-88-470-3957-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-88-470-3958-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation