Management of Henle’s trunk remains a technical challenge and a topic of active research in LRRH. Safe and efficient dissection of Henle’s trunk and its branches is critical for surgical success. Failure to accurately identify the origins of these vessels intraoperatively may result in hemorrhage and lead to serious complications11,12,13.
In the present study, a “cranial‑first” approach was employed, which involves incising the gastrocolic ligament to open the omental bursa and then tracing the RGEV to manage Henle’s trunk and its branches, along with the MCV, in preparation for subsequent dissection of the SMV and regional lymphadenectomy. This strategy is similar to that described by Matsuda et al.10, however, the MCA is not ligated from the cranial side in the present approach. Matsuda et al.14 proposed that during the primitive gastrointestinal development, the transverse mesocolon is located between the terminal midgut and the initial hindgut. After the primary intestinal loop undergoes a 270° counterclockwise rotation, the transverse mesocolon fuses with the anterior surface of the duodenum and pancreas. Concurrently, the greater omentum descends from the greater curvature of the stomach, draping over the anterior aspect of the transverse colon, and fuses with the transverse mesocolon. In addition, the draining veins of the right colon simultaneously join the RGEV, forming Henle’s trunk. The anatomical complexity of the transverse mesocolon stems from the rotation and fusion of the gastrointestinal tract during embryogenesis. The key features of this procedure include: facilitating exposure of the pancreas, early division of the aRCV, not ligating the MCA on the cranial side, and ease of dissection along the SMV. The colon and mesocolon are mobilized before vascular ligation, and by readily completing the separation of the transverse colon from the underlying pancreatic head and duodenum, tumor resectability can be assessed early in the operation. Furthermore, the anatomical structures of Henle’s trunk and its tributaries are clearly visualized, thereby avoiding high-risk manipulations of Henle’s trunk and middle colic vessels within a confined operative space. In obese patients or those with a thick colonic mesentery, the surgical difficulty is significantly increased. This is primarily because conventional approaches typically follow a caudal-to-cranial dissection sequence, which is compromised by the “pancreatic step” effect when exposing the inferior border of the pancreas and Henle’s trunk. Moreover, the thick mesenteric fat obscures the surgical field, often leading to ambiguous anatomical planes and inadequate exposure of the tributaries of Henle’s trunk. These challenges substantially increase the risk of inadvertent mesenteric venous injury and bleeding, ultimately resulting in nonuniform and suboptimal quality of lymph node dissection at the vascular roots. In contrast, our “cranial‑first” dissection pathway offers inherent anatomical advantages in pancreatic exposure and Henle’s trunk management. Once surgeons have overcome the learning curve, they can safely and confidently perform the most demanding and critical steps, even in difficult cases such as those involving obesity and mesenteric hypertrophy.
Conventional lymph node dissection at the vascular roots typically begins with an incision in the ileocolic mesentery, followed by gradual caudal-to-cranial dissection along the SMV. In patients with mesenteric hypertrophy and excessive adipose tissue, this approach results in a deeper SMV course and restricted surgical exposure, thereby markedly increasing both anatomical difficulty and the risk of intraoperative bleeding. In this study, a modified strategy was adopted that employs a longitudinal mesenteric incision superior to or left of the SMA, prioritizes artery-first ligation at the root, and uses a left-to-right “page‑turning” dissection technique. This approach preferentially addresses colic arterial branches crossing anterior to the SMV, allowing the entire SMV to be naturally and sequentially exposed through an intermediate “page‑turning” dissection. This modified technique transforms the traditional high‑risk dissection pattern of proceeding from superficial to deep and gradually approaching the SMV. It may simplify the root dissection process, improve the surgical field, and reduce the intraoperative blood loss, thereby making D3 lymphadenectomy more standardized and safer. Finally, priority management of Henle’s trunk and its tributaries allows early ligation of tumor‑feeding vessels, which helps prevent and reduce the risk of tumor dissemination, consistent with the “no‑touch” oncological principle proposed by Turnbull et al.15. The perioperative outcomes of the present study were compared with those of previously reported cranial-first approaches, as shown in Table 2. The present approach resulted in relatively less blood loss compared with previous studies5,8,9,10, along with a relative reduction in operative time8,10.
The limitations of this study include its retrospective, single-center, uncontrolled design and insufficient long-term follow-up data. Future randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are warranted to further validate these findings. Although the “cranial‑first” approach offers some advantages, it demands a higher level of anatomical expertise from the surgeon. Precise establishment of the fusion space between the gastric mesentery and the transverse mesocolon is challenging, and the learning curve is longer compared with the conventional caudal approach. Surgeons with extensive experience in upper abdominal and gastric surgery can acquire the skills for mobilizing this space more rapidly, thereby substantially shortening the learning cycle and accelerating technical proficiency.
In summary, the “cranial‑first” approach combined with intermediate lymphadenectomy is a safe and feasible procedure. It offers clear anatomical planes, reliable vascular management, standardized D3 lymphadenectomy, and favorable short-term clinical outcomes. This approach somewhat improves the technical limitations of conventional approaches in obese patients or those with mesenteric hypertrophy, may contribute to improved high‑quality CME and oncological outcomes, and clinical dissemination. However, the long‑term oncological benefits of this technique warrant further validation through RCTs studies with extended follow‑up.