Significance of Specimen Extraction Site in Minimizing Hernia Risk After Distal Pancreatectomy

Abstract

Background: Incisional hernia (IH) results in significant morbidity to patients and financial burden to healthcare systems. We aimed to determine the incidence of IH in distal pancreatectomy (DP) patients, stratified by specimen extraction sites.

Method: Imaging in DP patients in our institution from 2016 to 2021 were reviewed by radiologists blinded to the operative approach. Specimen extraction sites were stratified as upper midline/umbilical (UM) versus Pfannenstiel. IH was defined as fascial defect on postoperative imaging. Patients without preoperative and postoperative imaging were excluded.

Results: Of the 219 patients who met our selection criteria, the median age was 64 years, 54% were female, and 64% were White. The majority were minimally invasive (MIS) procedures (n = 131, 60%), of which 52% (n = 64) had a UM incision for specimen extraction, including 45 hand-assist and 19 purely laparoscopic procedures. MIS with Pfannenstiel incisions for specimen extraction was 48% (n = 58), including 44 robotic and 14 purely laparoscopic procedures. Mean follow-up time was 16.3 months (standard deviation [SD] 20.8). Follow-up for MIS procedures with UM incisions was 16.6 months (SD 21.8) versus 15.5 months (SD 18.6) in the Pfannenstiel group (p = 0.30). MIS procedures with UM incisions for specimen extraction had a 17.8 times increase in odds of developing an IH compared with MIS procedures with Pfannenstiel extraction sites (p = 0.01). The overall odds of developing an IH increased by 4% for every month of follow-up (odds ratio 1.04; p < 0.001).

Conclusion: A Pfannenstiel incision should be performed for specimen extraction in cases with purely laparoscopic or robotic distal pancreatectomy, when feasible.

Keywords: Distal pancreatectomy; Extraction site hernia; Hernia; Hernia post distal pancreatectomy; Incisional hernia; Pfannenstiel incision.