Features of laparoscopic and conventional decompression of the сeliac trunk

The OBJECTIVE was to study the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic decompression of the celiac trunk.

METHODS AND MATERIALS. A comparative analysis of the results of laparoscopic (30 patients) and conventional decompression of the celiac trunk (50 patients) was carried out. All patients were operated on between September 2018 and July 2021.

RESULTS. Intraoperative bleeding during laparoscopic decompression of the celiac trunk, which required conversion of access to laparotomy and vascular suture, was noted in 2 (6.7 %) cases. With conventional access, there were no such complications. The average duration of laparoscopic decompression of the celiac trunk was 107 minutes, from conventional access – 150 minutes. The average length of hospital stay after laparoscopic intervention was 4 days, after the traditional one – 7 days. Long-term results of treatment over a period of more than 6 months were evaluated in 28 patients who underwent laparoscopic decompression of the celiac trunk and 45 people who underwent conventional decompression. Ultrasound examination in all cases stated the return of linear and velocity parameters of blood flow in the celiac trunk to normal. complete relief of the clinical manifestations of the disease was achieved in 24 (85.7 %) patients after laparoscopic and in 39 (86.7 %) after traditional intervention.

CONCLUSION. Laparoscopic decompression of the celiac trunk is an effective method of surgical treatment of the syndrome of compression of the celiac trunk, but there are risks of vascular damage. The long-term results of laparoscopic and open decompression of the celiac trunk are comparable.

1. Arazińska A., Polguj M., Wojciechowski A., Trębiński Ł., Stefańczyk L. Median arcuate ligament syndrome: Predictor of ischemic complica- tions? // Clin Anat. 2016;29(8):1025–1030. Doi: 10.1002/ca.22773.

2. El-Hayek K. M., Titus J., Bui A., Mastracci T., Kroh M. Laparoscopic median arcuate ligament release: are we improving symptoms? // J. Аm. Coll. Surg. 2013;216(2):272–9. Doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.10.004.

3. Horton K. M., Talamini M. A., Fishman E. K. Median arcuate ligament syndrome: evaluation with CT angiography // Radiographics. 2005;25(5):1177–82. Doi: 10.1148/rg.255055001.

4. Bech F. R. Celiac artery compression syndromes // Surg. Clin. North Am. 1997;77(2):409–24. Doi: 10.1016/s0039-6109(05)70558-2.

5. Duffy A. J., Panait L., Eisenberg D., Bell R. L., Roberts K. E., Sumpio B. Management of median arcuate ligament syndrome: a new paradigm // Ann. Vasc. Surg. 2009;23(6):778–84. Doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2008.11.005.

6. Desmond C. P., Roberts S. K. Exercise-related abdominal pain as a manifestation of the median arcuate ligament syndrome // Scand. J. Gastroenterol. 2004;39(12):1310–3. Doi: 10.1080/00365520410008150.

7. Weber J. M., Boules M., Fong K., Abraham B., Bena J., El-Hayek K., Kroh M., Park W. M. Median Arcuate Ligament Syndrome Is Not a Vascular Disease // Ann. Vasc. Surg. 2016;30:22–7. Doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2015.07.013.

8. Barhatov I. V. , Barhatova N. A. Ultrasound methods and criteria for diag- nostics pathology unpaired visceral branches of the abdominal aorta (lit- erature report) // Journal of new medical technologies. 2017;1:270–277. (In Russ.). Doi: 10.12737/25098.

9. Manghat N. E., Mitchell G., Hay C. S., Wells I. P. The median arcuate ligament syndrome revisited by CT angiography and the use of ECG gating – a single centre case series and literature review // Br. J. Radiol. 2008;81(969):735–42. Doi: 10.1259/bjr/43571095.

10. Ignashov A. M., Den B., Perley V. Y., Gichkin A. Yu., Ustyuzhaninov A. S., Kachalov D. V., Tabakova T. M. Intraoperative ultrasound duplex scan- ning in the diagnosis and assessment of results of surgical treatment of patients with celiac compression syndrome // Grekov’s Bulletin of Surgery. 2012;171(6):049–053. (In Russ.). Doi: 10.24884/0042-4625-2012-171-6-049-053.

11. Ho K. K. F., Walker P., Smithers B. M., Foster W., Nathanson L., O’Rourke N., Shaw I., McGahan T. Outcome predictors in median ar- cuate ligament syndrome // J. Vasc. Surg. 2017;65(6):1745–1752. Doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.11.040.

12. Reilly L. M., Ammar A. D., Stoney R. J., Ehrenfeld W. K. Late results following operative repair for celiac artery compression syndrome // J. Vasc. Surg. 1985;2(1):79–91. PMID: 3965762.

13. Duran M., Simon F., Ertas N., Schelzig H., Floros N. Open vascular treatment of median arcuate ligament syndrome// BMC Surg. 2017; 17(1):95. Doi: 10.1186/s12893-017-0289-8. PMID: 28851450; PMCID: PMC5575896.

14. Sahm M., Otto R., Pross M., Scholbach T., Mantke R. Laparoscopic therapy of the coeliac artery compression syndrome: a critical analysis of the current standard procedure // Ann. R. Coll. Surg. Engl. 2020; 102(2):104–109. Doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2019.0121.

15. Tulloch A. W., Jimenez J. C., Lawrence P. F., Dutson E. P., Moore W. S., Rigberg D. A., Derubertis B. G., Quinones-Baldrich W. J. Laparoscopic versus open celiac ganglionectomy in patients with median arcuate ligament syndrome // J. Vasc. Surg. 2010;52(5):1283–9. Doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2010.05.083.

16. Roseborough G. S. Laparoscopic management of celiac artery com- pression syndrome // J.Vasc. Surg. 2009;50(1):124–33. Doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2008.12.078.

17. Baccari P., Civilini E., Dordoni L., Melissano G., Nicoletti R., Chiesa R. Celiac artery compression syndrome managed by laparoscopy // J. Vasc. Surg. 2009;50(1):134–9. Doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2008.11.124.