Minimally Invasive Surgical and Image-Guided Interventional Approaches to the Spleen


The treatment of spleen disorders in modern surgery requires an extensive knowledge of traditional “open” surgical approaches, minimally invasive surgical procedures, and image-guided interventional techniques that can be tailored to the specific disease. The two sections of this chapter will focus on minimally invasive and image-guided interventional approaches to the spleen.

Minimally invasive approaches to the spleen were crafted upon the rapid expansion of laparoscopic surgery in the early 1990s. Laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) rapidly became the procedure of choice for elective surgery in patients with a normal-sized spleen. Due to its fragility, rich blood supply, and close anatomic relationships with colon, stomach, pancreas, and kidney, the spleen poses special challenges for laparoscopic surgery. However, due to improvements in minimally invasive techniques and instrumentation we are now able to perform more challenging surgeries.

Image-guided percutaneous interventional techniques for spleen disorders are becoming increasingly frequent. This trend started in the early 1970s when Maddison reported the first successful splenic artery embolization in a patient with hepatic cirrhosis and recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding. Today, therapeutic embolization continues to play an important role in managing splenic problems and, for selected patients, it is considered a safe and effective alternative to surgical splenectomy.

Minimally Invasive Surgery for the Spleen

LS, first described in 1991 by Delaitre and Maignien, has rapidly gained worldwide acceptance as the first-line treatment for patients requiring elective splenectomy for normal-sized spleens. Conversion to open splenectomy is reported in less than 4% of cases—intraoperative bleeding being the most frequent cause. Improvements in laparoscopic techniques and instrumentation enable us to attempt the laparoscopic approach with more challenging cases, including patients with larger spleen or spleens in complex reoperative settings. The benefits from a minimally invasive approach are those of minimally invasive surgery established for other procedures and include reduced blood loss, better pain control, decreased perioperative morbidity, and shorter hospital length of stay.

Indications

Trauma

Trauma is the most common cause of death in people under the age of 45 years. Moreover, recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that nearly 200,000 people die from injury every year. Among these patients, the prevalence of intraabdominal injuries is about 15%, with the spleen being the most injured organ. Accordingly, trauma is the most common indication for splenectomy, with the vast majority of these being performed via laparotomy. However, over the past 30 years, efforts to preserve functional splenic tissue wherever feasible have been increasingly emphasized. As a consequence of this, the treatment of patients with blunt splenic injury has shifted from operative to nonoperative management. The current literature shows that 60% to 90% of patients are treated nonoperatively, and the accepted criteria for operative management are hemodynamic instability and associated intraabdominal or pelvic injury, which all require surgery. In the management of the injured spleen, the laparoscopic approach appears to have limited indications, and most trauma surgeons view minimally invasive surgery as contraindicated in major abdominal trauma. Only a few studies in literature report the performance of LS in the setting of blunt trauma, without conversion or major morbidity, and it has been suggested that laparoscopy may be reasonable in hemodynamically stable patients with spleen injury grade III ( Table 138.1 ). Instead, there is absolute contraindication in patients with hemodynamic instability and high bleeding rate (>500 mL/h). Furthermore, delayed LS may also be safe—especially if combined with adjunctive preoperative embolization, which appears to reduce the risk of continued or delayed hemorrhage. Delayed splenectomy is required in some of these patients because of continued bleeding or infarction with abscess formation. Successful delayed LS in this setting has been reported. In addition, laparoscopic techniques can be used to selectively apply electrocautery, fibrin, Gelfoam, suture repair, or to perform a partial splenectomy to control bleeding and preserve splenic tissue.

TABLE 138.1
American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Organ Injury Scale Spleen
Grade Injury Type Description of Injury
I Hematoma Subcapsular: <10% surface area
Laceration Capsular tear: <1 cm parenchymal depth
II Hematoma Subcapsular: 10%–50% surface area; intraparenchymal <5 cm in diameter
Laceration 1–3 cm parenchymal depth that does not involve a trabecular vessel
III Hematoma Subcapsular: >50% surface area or expanding; ruptured subcapsular or parenchymal hematoma; intraparenchymal hematoma >5 cm or expanding
Laceration >3 cm parenchymal depth or involving trabecular vessels
IV Laceration Laceration involving segmental or hilar vessels producing major devascularization (>25% of the spleen)
V Laceration Completely shattered spleen
Vascular Hilar vascular injury with devascularized spleen

Although some authors have shown that laparoscopy can be a safe tool in the armamentarium for the treatment of splenic injury, additional studies are needed to define the selection criteria for these patients.

Hematologic Disorders

Indications for elective LS are similar to “open” splenectomy, and the most common is hematologic disorders. For a normal-sized spleen, LS has now achieved standard-of-care status. Benign hematologic diseases such as idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), thrombotic thrombopenic purpura, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-related thrombocytopenia, hereditary spherocytosis, autoimmune hemolytic anemia, thalassemia intermedia, thalassemia major, sickle cell disease, and Evans syndrome are the absolute indications. Relative indications are unresponsiveness to medical therapy, disease relapse, splenomegaly, frequent transfusions, adverse effects, or dependency on steroid therapy. Current literature suggests that in patients who come under any of the previously mentioned indications, LS should be offered as the surgical treatment of choice. Among hematologic disorders, the most common indication is idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura. Kovaleva et al. reviewed their 20-year experience with more than 1000 ITP patients. First-line treatment for ITP remains medical therapy, usually steroids. Second-line treatment after failure of medical therapy is splenectomy, which achieves 80% remission, with good long-term results (60 months or longer) in 32% of patients.

Box 138.1 summarizes the indications for LS.

Box 138.1
Indications for Laparoscopic Splenectomy

Platelet Disorders

  • Idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura

  • Human immunodeficiency virus–related idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura

  • Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura

  • Evans syndrome

Anemias/Red Blood Cell Disorders

  • Autoimmune hemolytic anemia

  • Hereditary spherocytosis

  • Hereditary elliptocytosis

  • Hereditary pyropoikilocytosis

  • White blood cell disorders/malignancy

  • Hodgkin lymphoma

  • Non-Hodgkin lymphoma

  • Chronic myeloid leukemia

  • Chronic lymphocytic leukemia

  • Hairy cell leukemia

  • Myelofibrosis

  • Primary splenic tumors

Miscellaneous

  • Splenic abscess

  • Splenic cysts

  • Splenic trauma

  • Sarcoidosis

  • Hypersplenism—Gaucher disease, Felty syndrome, systemic lupus erythematosus, splenic vein thrombosis

Contraindications

Absolute contraindications in the setting of hematologic disorders are uncorrected coagulopathy, severe comorbidities that increase the operative risks, and hematologic malignancies localized outside of the spleen. A low platelet count (<10 × 10 9 /L) should no longer be considered as an absolute contraindication. Current literature states that the increased surgical experience, as well as advances in laparoscopic techniques and instruments, have made it possible to operate on patients with low platelet counts safely and effectively. Although the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery guidelines consider portal hypertension as an absolute contraindication for LS, several publications reported on the safety of this method in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Cai et al., for instance, described 24 successful cases of splenectomy for hypersplenism in cirrhotic patients.

Absolute contraindications in the setting of trauma are splenic injury grade IV and V (see Table 138.1 ), and acute hemorrhage, with a bleeding rate greater than 500 mL/h on serial ultrasound examinations.

Patient Selection

Spleen size remains the most important determinant in patient selection for elective open versus LS, as well as in predicting success of the minimally invasive surgical approach. LS should be performed with caution in cases of massive splenomegaly, which is defined as a maximum spleen diameter greater than 25 cm, or as an estimated spleen volume exceeding 1000 mL. Under these circumstances, laparoscopy is correlated with higher conversion rate, and intra- and postoperative complications. At a threshold of 500 g for defining a “large” spleen, there are no differences in conversion rates, lengths of stay, or complications. However, at a threshold of 1000 g, conversion rates for large spleens may approach 60%. Few surgeons use 2 kg as an exclusion criteria for LS. Although spleen weight can retrospectively correlate with minimally invasive splenectomy success or failure, it is difficult to assess preoperatively. Spleen size based on computed tomography (CT) or ultrasound imaging measurements provides a more practical preoperative selection criterion. As a guideline, spleen size on ultrasound or CT scan should be less than 20 to 25 cm in the craniocaudal axis. Larger spleens have been removed laparoscopically, but the procedure is technically demanding due to the limited abdominal working space, an increased risk of bleeding, and difficulty in retrieving the spleen. If LS is chosen, it can be performed using the same surgical technique, providing that the ports are placed more caudally on the abdominal wall, according to the location of the lower pole of the spleen. For these patients, hand-assisted LS has been proposed as an effective, safe, and feasible alternative. Analyzing the feasibility of LS in cases of massive splenomegaly (spleen weight >2000 g), Al-Mulhim et al. concluded that although LS was feasible in 90% of patients, the condition was significantly associated with prolonged operative time, more blood loss, increased postoperative morbidity, and prolonged postoperative hospital stay. Splenic weight above a cutoff value of 1311.5 g has been proposed to be associated with higher risk of conversion and transfusion, and has also been found to be a significant independent risk factor for portal and splenic vein thrombosis after LS.

Laparoscopic success may be improved by preoperative splenic artery embolization, and a hand-assisted technique. Grahn reported a 10-year retrospective review of LS for 85 patients of whom 25 (29%) had massive or supermassive spleens, with an increasing number of these (40% to 50%) approached laparoscopically during the later years of the study. Despite the increase in giant spleens in the minimally invasive group, conversion rates declined from 33% halfway through the 10-year period to 0% for the final 2 years of the study, with no reoperations for bleeding and no deaths. This study showed that experience remains a key predictor of successful LS.

Preoperative Considerations

Imaging

Preoperative imaging with ultrasound and/or CT scan is essential for operative planning. Imaging can help assess spleen size and can also delineate useful anatomic relationships that impact the conduct of surgery. The normal spleen measures about 11 cm in length. Moderate splenomegaly, from 11 to 25 cm, should be noted in preoperative planning. Massive splenomegaly, greater than 25 cm length, may change preoperative and intraoperative strategy. Preoperative imaging may also identify accessory spleens, reported in 10% to 20% of patients. In addition, ultrasound is critical in trauma settings because it helps the decision-making process by assessing the bleeding rate.

Although not indicated for a normal-sized spleen, preoperative splenic artery embolization can be useful in patients with massive splenomegaly. Timing is important because patients can develop significant pain from infarcted splenic tissue; it is suggested to perform angioembolization within 24 hours before surgery. Preoperative angioembolization of the splenic artery for LS is safe and reduces the conversion rate.

General Considerations: Antibiotic Prophylaxis, Deep Venous Thrombosis Prophylaxis, Bowel Preparation

A broad-spectrum antibiotic prophylaxis should be administered at the time of induction to anesthesia and continued postoperatively for at least 24 hours. Patients undergoing splenectomy for a hematologic disorder should undergo the same preparation that they would for open splenectomy, which may include administration of steroids, immune globulin, fresh-frozen plasma, cryoprecipitate, or platelets. Blood products must be available intraoperatively, especially platelets for patients with severe thrombocytopenia. Prophylactic platelet transfusions are typically given only when the platelet count is below 50,000 and the platelets are administered only after the splenic artery has been ligated.

All patients require deep venous thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis, including pneumatic sequential compression devices, pre- and postoperative low-dose subcutaneous unfractionated heparin prophylaxis, and early postoperative ambulation. Controversy remains over the length of postoperative DVT prophylaxis. For high-risk patients, DVT prophylaxis should be considered up to and beyond 14 days after surgery.

Bowel preparation before splenectomy is not mandatory. A limited prep the night before surgery may clear the left colon of stool bulk, with the purposes of improving colon mobilization and avoiding postoperative constipation.

Immunization Against Overwhelming Postsplenectomy Infection

Patients who undergo splenectomy are at increased risk of overwhelming postsplenectomy infection (OPSI), with a lifetime risk of 3% to 5%. The annual incidence of OPSI is between 0.23% and 0.42%. Risk is highest in three groups: (1) patients at the extremes of age, (2) immunocompromised patients, and (3) patients with hematologic disorders. Previously healthy patients who require splenectomy due to trauma are the lowest risk groups. When OPSI occurs, it is a true emergency, can be lethal, and requires immediate parenteral antibiotics and intensive care support. Intravenous immunoglobulin may play a beneficial role. OPSI carries a mortality rate of 38% to 69%. In general, OPSI results from decreased antigenic clearance, loss of opsonization, and decreased immunologic response. Streptococcus pneumoniae is the most common infective agent, isolated in 50% to 90% of patients, followed by Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib), Streptococcus group B, Staphylococcus aureus , Escherichia coli, and other coliforms. Increased susceptibility to parasites and malaria is noted in endemic areas. Increased risk to Neisseria meningitidis infection has not been documented but remains a theoretical risk. Ideally, immunization against encapsulated organisms should be given 14 days prior to surgery. Recommended immunizations include polyvalent pneumococcal, meningococcal, and Haemophilus vaccinations. Pneumovax provides protection against 73% of OPSI-causing organisms. Data on revaccination remain unclear, but current consensus favors a Pneumovax booster every 5 to 10 years, which may be protective against all OPSI bacteria. Hib/Meningococcal/Influenza vaccine benefit is unconfirmed but recommended. For patients who do not receive recommended OPSI immunizations prior to surgery (such as trauma patients), vaccination is performed just before hospital discharge and is preferred over relying on patient compliance.

Operative Approach

There is wide variation in the technique of LS with respect to approach, patient positioning, port site placement, number of ports, and instrumentation.

Minimally invasive surgery requires a high-technology environment. The surgeon should review with the operative team the equipment as part of the “time out” before the procedure starts to ensure that all instruments are available, including the following: video towers with high-definition cameras, insufflator, high-intensity light source, video-capture device, preferred energy sources (Harmonic scalpel, LigaSure, etc.), angled telescope (preferably a 45-degree telescope), suction irrigator, additional laparoscopic ports (if needed), laparoscopic retractor, retrieval bags, endoscopic staplers, endoclips, morcellator (if needed), and other special tools such as hand-assist devices.

Anatomic Considerations

LS is not a forgiving procedure. Methodical control of the hemostasis is the key for success. The splenic parenchyma is fragile, has a rich blood supply, and is particularly vulnerable to capsular tear and hemorrhage. Understanding the variation of splenic anatomy is essential for a safe intraoperative management.

Michels' 1942 review of 100 spleens suggested that no two spleens have the same anatomy. Michels divided splenic blood supply into two types: distributed and magistral—with the distributed type being present in 70% of patients. Splenic size does not correlate with the number or distribution of splenic arteries, although the number of splenic notches and tubercles does. Splenic hilar anatomy can include numerous branches with various division levels. In addition, six or more short gastric arteries may be found in the gastrosplenic ligament arising from the fundus of the stomach. The lienorenal ligament contains hilar vessels and the tail of the pancreas. In nearly three-quarters of patients, the tail of the pancreas lies within 1 cm from the spleen, and direct contact between pancreas and spleen is found in about one-third of patients.

You're Reading a Preview

Become a Clinical Tree membership for Full access and enjoy Unlimited articles

Become membership

If you are a member. Log in here