BACKGROUND: Solid pseudopapillary neoplasms (SPNs) of the pancreas are rare tumors, comprising about 1 % of pancreatic tumors. They primarily affect females during their reproductive phase and have a favorable prognosis. SPNs are usually asymptomatic or present with mild symptoms. The exact histopathogenesis of SPNs remains unknown. Surgical resection is curative, and central pancreatectomy is a pancreas-sparing surgical technique.
METHODS: A 33-year-old female presented with epigastric pain, vomiting, and infertility. Imaging revealed a mass in the pancreas. Exploration confirmed the mass, and central pancreatectomy was performed. Histopathology confirmed the diagnosis of SPN. The patient\'s recovery was uneventful, and follow-up CT scans showed no recurrence.
CONCLUSIONS: This case involves a 33-year-old female presenting with epigastric pain and vomiting, revealing a cystic mass with a solid component in the pancreas. While generally benign, SPNs can become malignant in 15 % cases, with a favorable prognosis. Histopathologically, SPNs remain distinct, with CD99 and CD10 staining confirming the diagnosis. Diagnostic imaging, particularly CT scans, aids in identifying SPNs. Surgical resection, such as central pancreatectomy, is effective, preserving organ function. The case\'s positive outcome aligns with an overall 5-year survival rate of 95-97 %, highlighting the overall favorable prognosis of SPNs. The procedure\'s balance between tumor removal and organ preservation offers clinical advantages.
CONCLUSIONS: This case underscores the successful management of an SPN using central pancreatectomy. It highlights the importance of early diagnosis and surgical intervention, as well as the favorable prognosis associated with SPNs, even in cases of metastasis. Central pancreatectomy offers organ preservation and reduces long-term complications. Continued reporting and research on such cases contribute to refining treatment strategies for SPNs.

BACKGROUND: Central pancreatectomy (CP) is considered a viable alternative to subtotal distal pancreatectomy, for lesions involving the neck or proximal pancreatic body. Multivisceral central pancreatectomy (MVCP) for locally advanced tumors of the pancreatic body remains unreported.
METHODS: We hereby report a case of locally advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (NET) with gastric involvement. The patient underwent successful central pancreatectomy with subtotal gastrectomy for locally advanced NET of the pancreas. In the follow up period, relevant complications like pancreatic insufficiency or pancreatic fistula were not encountered. The patient is doing well more than ten months after resection.
CONCLUSIONS: A MVCP can be considered in patients with limited pancreatic involvement, as long as sufficient pancreatic parenchyma can be preserved. Additional organ involvement mandating resection should not be considered a contra indication to this procedure. With careful surgical planning and meticulous technique, risk of post operative complications after MVCP can be minimized with added benefit of long term endocrine and exocrine integrity.
CONCLUSIONS: CP is a viable alternative and can be performed with adjacent organ resection, with acceptable post operative outcomes.

Traumatic injury to the main pancreatic duct requires surgical treatment, but optimal management strategies have not been established. In patients with isolated pancreatic injury, the pancreatic parenchyma must be preserved to maintain long-term quality of life. We herein report a case of traumatic pancreatic injury with main pancreatic duct injury in the head of the pancreas. Two years later, the patient underwent a side-to-side anastomosis between the distal pancreatic duct and the jejunum. Eleven years later, he presented with abdominal pain and severe gastrointestinal bleeding from the Roux limb. Emergency surgery was performed with resection of the Roux limb along with central pancreatectomy. We attempted to preserve both portions of the remaining pancreas, including the injured pancreas head. We considered the pancreatic fluid outflow tract from the distal pancreatic head and performed primary reconstruction with a double pancreaticogastrostomy to avoid recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding. The double pancreaticogastrostomy allowed preservation of the injured pancreatic head considering the distal pancreatic fluid outflow from the pancreatic head and required no anastomoses to the small intestine.

BACKGROUND: In melanoma, completely resectable metastases are surgically resected to expect to prolong relapse-free survival and overall survival. However, distant metastases of melanoma are rarely indicated for surgery because multiple metastases are often observed at diagnosis. We report a case of a man in his 50s who underwent laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy and central pancreatectomy for gastric metastases, lymph node metastases, and pancreatic invasion that could be completely resected.
METHODS: A 50-year-old man was diagnosed with malignant melanoma of the left parietal region. After diagnosis, tumor resection and left cervical lymph node dissection were performed, and interferon-β treatment was added as adjuvant therapy. Seventeen months after adjuvant therapy, metastasis of stomach and abdominal lymph nodes from melanoma was diagnosed. And the pancreatic invasion of lymph nodes was suspected. Laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy and the central pancreatectomy were performed because pancreatic invasion of melanoma was intraoperatively found. After 9 months of relapse-free survival, abdominal recurrence was observed. Nivolumab and ipilimumab were administered, and recurrent lesions are currently controlled. The patient has survived more than 3 years since metastasis resection.
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy and the central pancreatectomy were performed for gastric and perigastric lymph node metastases and pancreatic invasion due to malignant melanoma, and the negative surgical margin was achieved. Although patient selection is required, the central pancreatectomy was a good indication for maintaining exocrine and endocrine function. The development of immune checkpoint inhibitors and molecular-targeted agents may increase gastrointestinal surgery for metastatic melanoma in the future.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic trauma accounts for only 0.2% of blunt trauma and 1-12% of penetrating injuries. Injuries to other organs, such as spleen, liver, or kidney, are associated with 50.5% of the cases. The isolated complete traumatic transection of the pancreatic neck is rare. In the past, pancreatoduodenectomy or distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy was the standard care for patients with traumatic transection of the pancreatic head, duodenum or distal pancreas, and pancreatic neck. However, limited cases have been reported on the central pancreatectomy for pancreatic neck injuries. We present a rare case of a 21-year-old male patient who received central pancreatectomy for isolated complete traumatic transection of the pancreatic neck.
METHODS: A 21-year-old male patient with mild abdominal pain and showed no apparent abnormality in the initial abdominal computed tomography (CT) was brought to the local hospital\'s emergency department due to a traffic accident. The patient\'s abdominal pain became progressively worse during observation in the hospital that led to the patient being referred to our hospital. The patient\'s vital signs were stable, and a physical examination revealed marked tenderness and rebound pain throughout the abdomen. The patient\'s white blood cells were increased; The serum amylase and lipase levels were elevated. The abdominal computed tomography revealed pancreatic neck parenchymal discontinuity, peripancreatic effusion, and hemorrhage. The patient underwent exploratory laparotomy. Intraoperative examination identified the neck of the pancreas was completely ruptured, and no apparent abnormalities were observed in the other organs. The patient underwent central pancreatectomy and Roux -Y pancreaticojejunostomy. The patient was treated with antibiotics, acid inhibition and nutritional supports for 10 days after surgery. Symptoms of the patient were significantly relieved, and white blood cells, serum amylase, and lipase levels returned to normal. The patient underwent follow up examination for 6 months with no evidence of exocrine or endocrine insufficiency.
CONCLUSIONS: Central pancreatectomy is an effective pancreas parenchyma preserving procedure, may be a promising alternative to distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy for this complex pancreatic trauma in hemodynamically stable patients. Patient selection and surgeon experience are crucial in the technical aspects of this procedure.

BACKGROUND: Portal annular pancreas (PAP) is a rare congenital anatomical abnormality of the pancreas in which the portal vein is encircled by aberrant parenchyma, and special attention is needed for pancreatic resections. This is the first report of central pancreatectomy (CP) in a PAP for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC).
METHODS: A 76-year-old man who had a history of left nephrectomy for renal cancer not otherwise specified 36 years earlier and radical cystectomy for bladder cancer 4 years earlier was incidentally found to have a pancreatic tumor and a liver tumor. The pancreatic tumor was diagnosed as metastasis of clear cell RCC, and the liver tumor was diagnosed as moderately differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on preoperative histological evaluation. Preoperative computed tomography imaging showed a type 3A PAP, in which the main pancreatic duct (MPD) ran ventral to the portal vein (anteportal type), and the aberrant parenchyma was located cranial to the confluence of the portal vein and splenic vein (suprasplenic type). After adhesiotomy and partial liver resection, CP was performed. With intraoperative ultrasound guidance, the aberrant parenchyma of the PAP could be preserved, avoiding additional resection. Thus, two pancreatic transections were performed, creating a single-cut margin that contained the MPD in the distal pancreas. Oncologically safe margins were confirmed by intraoperative pathological diagnosis. The distal pancreas was reconstructed by pancreatojejunostomy in the routine procedures. The pathological diagnosis of the surgical specimens was identical to the preoperative diagnosis. A postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) developed from the proximal stump of the head of the pancreas, necessitating no specific treatment other than drainage. The patient showed no signs or symptoms of recurrent RCC or abnormal pancreatic function for 2 years after the operation, although a histologically proven new HCC lesion developed distant from the initial site 8 months after the operation.
CONCLUSIONS: Precise preoperative evaluation of the tumor features and PAP allowed adequate surgical strategies to be planned. Intraoperative ultrasound was useful to minimize parenchymal resections of the PAP. CP is still a challenging procedure in terms of the development of POPF.

OBJECTIVE: Central pancreatectomy (CP) has been applied for treating benign and low-grade malignant tumors in pancreatic neck, but studies regarding CP for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are quite limited. We aimed to investigate the role of central pancreatectomy in the treatment of PDAC in the neck of the pancreas.
METHODS: Patients who underwent CP at our hospital between 2009 and 2016 were identified. Patients treated by distal pancreatectomy (DP) were matched according to the tumor size, location, and staging. The surgical and survival outcomes were compared between the CP and DP groups.
RESULTS: Nine patients had CP. Five (56%) had postoperative complications and three (33%) had clinically significant (grade B + C) fistula. No significant difference was found between the CP and DP groups for the rate of overall morbidity, pancreatic fistula, reoperation, and readmission. Tumor size was smaller in the CP group compared to the DP group. The mortality of both groups was zero. The median postoperative survival was similar between the two groups (20.4 months for CP vs 19.4 months for DP, P = 0.842).
CONCLUSIONS: CP is safe for patients with small PDAC at the neck of the pancreas. Considering the good preservation of pancreatic endocrine and exocrine functions, CP could be considered as an alternative procedure for single small PDAC in pancreatic neck.

BACKGROUND: Solid pseudopapillary neoplasm (SPN) of the pancreas is a rare neoplasm, affecting primarily young females. Because SPNs are of low-malignancy, they rarely obstruct the main pancreatic duct (MPD) and cause atrophy of the distal pancreas even if their tumor sizes are large.
METHODS: A 35-year-old female was referred to our hospital due to pancreatic tumor. Imaging findings showed the presence of well-defined round tumor in the body of the pancreas with 25-mm in diameter. The pancreas parenchyma distal to the tumor was markedly atrophic, and MPD dilatation was not observed. The lesion was diagnosed as SPN by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), and central pancreatectomy was performed. Intraoperative frozen section of the distal atrophic pancreas showed no evidence of acinar cells, indicating exocrine dysfunction. Therefore, we closed distal pancreas stump instead of reconstruction. In the distal atrophic parenchyma, scattered foci of islets of Langerhans and the vestige of dilated MPD were observed. She has shown neither endocrine nor exocrine insufficiency after surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: SPNs are usually found without atrophic change of distal pancreas. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of SPN in which exocrine dysfunction of atrophic pancreas was demonstrated pathologically and central pancreatectomy without anastomosis of distal pancreas was chosen for the surgical treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: We reported a very rare case of SPN with marked distal parenchymal atrophy. We successfully performed central pancreatectomy without reconstruction.

Background: Insulinomas are a rare entity commonly treated by resection. Central pancreatectomy represents an uncommon type of resection for pancreatic lesions. Case Presentation: A 77-year-old female underwent a central pancreatectomy with Roux-en-Y pancreaticojejunostomy and pancreatic stump oversew after presenting with symptoms of hypoglycemia concerning for an insulinoma. Her hospital course was uncomplicated and her symptoms resolved after resection. Conclusion: Resection of insulinomas is the preferred approach of treatment, and resection by central pancreatectomy is a safe option for benign lesions in the neck of the pancreas.

Schwannomas are mesenchymal tumors originating from Schwann cells in peripheral nerve sheaths. Although the tumor can be located in any part of the human body, the most common locations are the head, neck, trunk and extremities. Pancreatic schwannomas are rare. To our knowledge, only 64 cases of pancreatic schwannoma have been reported in the English literature over the past 40 years. In this paper, we present a pancreatic schwannoma in a 59-year-old female. Ultrasound, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging revealed the tumor located in the pancreatic body; however, accurate diagnosis was hard to obtain preoperatively and a pancreatic cystadenoma was preliminarily considered. During laparotomy, the mass was found in the body of the pancreas. An enlarged gallbladder with multiple stones was also observed. We performed central pancreatectomy, end-to-side pancreaticojejunostomy and cholecystectomy. Notably, central pancreatectomy has been reported in only one case prior to this report. The gross specimen showed a mass with a thin capsule, 1.6 cm × 1.1 cm × 1.1 cm in size. Microscopic examination showed that the tumor was mainly composed of spindle-shaped cells with palisading arrangement and no atypia, which is consistent with a benign tumor. Both hypercellular and hypocellular areas were visible. Immunohistochemical staining revealed strongly positive results for protein S-100. Finally, the tumor was diagnosed as a schwannoma of the pancreatic body. Postoperatively, the patient recovered well and left the hospital 6 d later. During the 53-mo follow-up period, the patient remained well and free of complications.