Esplenectomía laparoscópica en esplenomegalia masiva por linfoma no Hodgkin de zona marginal

Martina Tristant; Daniel González González

doi:10.29193/RMU.37.3.12

Authors

Martina Tristant Universidad de la República, Facultad de Medicina, Cirugía General, Residente
Daniel González González Universidad de la República, Facultad de Medicina, Clínica Quirúrgica 3, Profesor Titular. Cooperativa Médica de Florida, Departamento de Cirugía, Jefe

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29193/RMU.37.3.12

Keywords:

MASSIVE SPLENOMEGALY, SPLENECTOMY, LAPAROSCOPY, NON-HODGKIN LYMPHOMA

Abstract

Introduction: despite the fact that laparoscopic splenectomy for massive and supramassive splenomegaly constitutes a technical challenge, it is a feasible and safe procedure in the context of institutions with experienced teams in laparoscopic surgery.
Objective: to present the first case of laparoscopic splenectomy for massive splenomegaly in Uruguay.
Clinical case: the study presents the case of a 70-year-old patient carrier of peripheral pancytopenia, massive splenomegaly and a diagnosis of type B lymphoproliferative neoplasm based on bone marrow aspiration and biopsy, who underwent diagnostic and therapeutic splenectomy.
The patient was operated in supine position with a 15-degree tilt, the trocars were placed under direct view, adapted to the size of the spleen which went from the diaphragm until the superior pelvic outlet. Splenectomy was performed in 220 minutes, the entire piece was removed through a hemi Pfannenstiel incision, without placing it in a bag, the wall being protected with a surgical wound retractor. There were no complications and the patient was discharged from hospital 48 hours. The blood count performed after 24 hours evidenced increase in all cell series and the pathology report confirmed diagnosis of marginal zone non- Hodgkin lymphoma.
Discussion: laparoscoppic splenectomy in massive splenomegaly requires of a greater surgical time, although blood loss and hospital star are lower when compared to conventional procedures and evidence similar morbility. The initial experience of surgical teams reports 30% of conversions and readmissions.

References

1) Habermalz B, Sauerland S, Decker G, Delaitre B, Gigot JF, Leandros E, et al. Laparoscopic splenectomy: the clinical practice guidelines of the European, Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES). Surg Endosc 2008; 22(4): 821-48.
2) Swanson TW, Meneghetti AT, Sampath S, Connors JM, Panton ON. Can J Surg 2011; 54(3):189-93.
3) Wu Z, Zhou J, Pankaj P, Peng B. Comparative treatment and literature review for laparoscopic splenectomy alone versus preoperative splenic artery embolization splenectomy. Surg Endosc 2012; 26(10):2758-66.
4) Grahn SW, Alvarez J 3rd, Kirkwood K. Trends in laparoscopic splenectomy for massive splenomegaly. Arch Surg 2006; 141(8):755-61.
5) Casaccia M, Sormani MP, Palombo D, Dellepiane C, Ibatici A. Laparoscopic splenectomy versus open splenectomy in massive and giant spleens: should we update the 2008 EAES guidelines? Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2019; 29(3):178-81.
6) Tsamalaidze L, Stauffer JA, Permenter SL, Asbun HJ. Laparoscopic splenectomy for massive splenomegaly: does size matter? J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2017; 27(10):1009-14.
7) Koshenkov VP, Németh ZH, Carter MS. Laparoscopic splenectomy: outcome and efficacy for massive and supramassive spleens. Am J Surg 2012; 203(4):517-22.
8) Rodríguez-Luna MR, Balagué C, Fernández-Ananín S, Vilallonga R, Targarona Soler EM. Outcomes of laparoscopic splenectomy for treatment of splenomegaly: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg 2021; 45(2):465-79.
9) Shin RD, Lis R, Levergood NR, Brooks DC, Shoji BT, Tavakkoli A. Laparoscopic versus open splenectomy for splenomegaly: the verdict is unclear. Surg Endosc 2019; 33(4):1298-303.