Pancreatic enucleation using the da Vinci robotic surgical system: a report of 26 cases

Laparoscopic pancreatic enucleation: how far should we go for parenchyma preservation? A study by the French National Association of Surgery

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic enucleation is indicated for selected patients and tumours with very low oncological risk to preserve a maximum of healthy pancreatic parenchyma. Minimally invasive pancreatic enucleation (MIPE) is increasingly performed. This study aims to assess the impact of tumor location and center experience on textbook outcomes (TBO) in patients undergoing MIPE.

METHODS

Retrospective nationwide multicentric cohort study including MIPE performed between 2010 and 2021. Tumor localization was classified as head/uncus, neck or body/tail (results are presented in this order). Centers were classified according to a mean volume of MI pancreatectomies performed per year: lower (< 5/year), intermediate (5 to 10/year) and higher volume (≥ 10/year). TBO was defined as meeting all 6 criteria: no postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), no post-pancreatectomy haemorrhage (PPH), no bile leak, no readmission, no mortality, and no severe morbidity.

RESULTS

27 participating centers performed 200 MIPE located in head/uncus (n = 65, 33%), neck (n = 26, 13%) and body/tail (n = 109, 55%), 8% of them performed by robotic approach. Mortality reached 1.5% (n = 3). Head/uncus lesions were larger (p = 0.03), frequently BD-IPMN (p = 0.04), with significant longer operative time (p = 0.002). TBO achievement was high across all tumor locations (52 vs. 73 vs. 67%, p = 0.09) with higher PPH (p = 0.03) or bile leaks (p = 0.03) for head/uncus lesions. In multivariate analysis, overweight (OR 0.49), preoperative biopsy (OR 0.41) and head/uncus lesion (OR 0.34) were independently associated with lower TBO. No independent risk factor was found for POPF or severe morbidity. While expertise level influenced indications, with more cystic lesions (p = 0.002), larger tumors (p = 0.003), 3D use (p = 0.001), and head/uncus lesions (p = 0.04) in high volume centers, TBO was not significantly different (p = 0.45).

CONCLUSIONS

MIPE is feasible with 1.5% mortality whatever its localization with higher morbidity for head/uncus lesions, justified by the will to avoid pancreaticoduodenectomy. High volume centers push the limits of MIPE without increasing morbidity.

Recommendations on Robotic Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery. The Paris Jury-Based Consensus Conference

OBJECTIVE

To establish the first consensus guidelines on the safety and indications of robotics in Hepato-Pancreatic-Biliary (HPB) surgery. The secondary aim was to identify priorities for future research.

BACKGROUND

HPB robotic surgery is reaching the IDEAL 2b exploration phase for innovative technology. An objective assessment endorsed by the HPB community is timely and needed.

METHODS

The ROBOT4HPB conference developed consensus guidelines using the Zurich-Danish model. An impartial and multidisciplinary jury produced unbiased guidelines based on the work of 10 expert panels answering predefined key questions and considering the best-quality evidence retrieved after a systematic review. The recommendations conformed with the GRADE and SIGN50 methodologies.

RESULTS

Sixty-four experts from 20 countries considered 285 studies, and the conference included an audience of 220 attendees. The jury (n=10) produced recommendations or statements covering 5 sections of robotic HPB surgery: technology, training and expertise, outcome assessment, and liver and pancreatic procedures. The recommendations supported the feasibility of robotics for most HPB procedures and its potential value in extending minimally invasive indications, emphasizing, however, the importance of expertise to ensure safety. The concept of expertise was defined broadly, encompassing requirements for credentialing HPB robotics at a given center. The jury prioritized relevant questions for future trials and emphasized the need for prospective registries, including validated outcome metrics for the forthcoming assessment of HPB robotics.

CONCLUSIONS

The ROBOT4HPB consensus represents a collaborative and multidisciplinary initiative, defining state-of-the-art expertise in HPB robotics procedures. It produced the first guidelines to encourage their safe use and promotion.

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for sporadic benign insulinoma: Short- and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery is the optimal treatment for insulinoma. The present study aimed to compare short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic surgery for sporadic benign insulinoma.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic surgery for insulinoma at our center between September 2007 and December 2019 was conducted. The demographic, perioperative and postoperative follow-up results were compared between the laparoscopic and robotic groups.

RESULTS

A total of 85 patients were enrolled, including 36 with laparoscopic approach and 49 with robotic approach. Enucleation was the preferred surgical procedure. Fifty-nine patients (69.4%) underwent enucleation; among them, 26 and 33 patients underwent laparoscopic and robotic surgery, respectively. Robotic enucleation had a lower conversion rate to laparotomy (0 vs. 19.2%, P = 0.013), shorter operative time (102.0 vs. 145.5 min, P = 0.008) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (6.0 vs. 8.5 d, P = 0.002) than laparoscopic enucleation. There were no differences between the groups in terms of intraoperative blood loss, the rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula and complications. After a median follow-up of 65 months, two patients in the laparoscopic group developed a functional recurrence and none of the patients in the robotic group had a recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic enucleation can reduce the conversion rate to laparotomy and shorten operative time, which might lead to a reduction in postoperative hospital stay.

Pioneering robotic-assisted surgery for insulinoma during pregnancy: The first case report and literature review

Introduction

Insulinoma during pregnancy is a rare condition with vague clinical symptoms, making diagnosis challenging. The standard treatment for insulinoma is surgical tumor removal, preferably using a minimally invasive method. However, there have been no recorded examples of employing a robotic platform in pregnant women with insulinoma. In this report, we present the first successful case of robotic enucleation for insulinoma during pregnancy.

Case presentation

A 30-year-old pregnant woman presented with recurrent hypoglycemic symptoms throughout her first trimester that were relieved by food intake. After confirming endogenous hyperinsulinemia, an abdominal magnetic resonance imaging scan was performed to locate the tumor. A well-defined 2-cm mass was found in the pancreatic body. Robotic enucleation was performed at week 18 of gestation, and the patient experienced relief from hypoglycemic episodes postoperatively. Her blood glucose levels returned to normal, and she had an uneventful pregnancy. The patient eventually delivered a healthy baby via cesarean section without any complications.

Conclusions

For a subset of pregnant individuals with insulinoma, a minimally invasive approach as robotic-assisted surgery is safe and feasible. This innovative technique has the potential to both mothers and fetuses.

Robotic pancreatic tumor enucleation by the double bipolar technique using the da Vinci SP system: An initial case report with a technical detail

Pancreatic tumor enucleation is a procedure that can preserve pancreatic function and is sometimes performed using a minimally invasive approach. Recently, a single-port robotic platform called da Vinci SP has been developed. However, the technical details of pancreatic tumor enucleation using da Vinci SP have not been reported to date. We report a male patient in his 70s who underwent robotic SP pancreatic tumor enucleation for a pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor. The dissection between the tumor and pancreatic parenchyma was performed using the double bipolar technique. The operative time was 139 min, and the estimated blood loss was 4 mL. The patient had an uneventful recovery and was discharged on the sixth day after the surgery. Robotic SP pancreatic tumor enucleation appears to be a feasible procedure with lower invasiveness and better cosmesis.

Robotic Parenchymal-Sparing Pancreatectomy: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Parenchymal-sparing approaches to pancreatectomy are technically challenging procedures but allow for preserving a normal pancreas and decreasing the rate of postoperative pancreatic insufficiency. The robotic platform is increasingly being used for these procedures. We sought to evaluate robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomy and assess its complication profile and efficacy.

METHODS

This systematic review consisted of all studies on robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomy (central pancreatectomy, duodenum-preserving partial pancreatic head resection, enucleation, and uncinate resection) published between January 2001 and December 2022 in PubMed and Embase.

RESULTS

A total of 23 studies were included in this review (n = 788). Robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomy is being performed worldwide for benign or indolent pancreatic lesions. When compared to the open approach, robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomies led to a longer average operative time, shorter length of stay, and higher estimated intraoperative blood loss. Postoperative pancreatic fistula is common, but severe complications requiring intervention are exceedingly rare. Long-term complications such as endocrine and exocrine insufficiency are nearly nonexistent.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomy appears to have a higher risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula but is rarely associated with severe or long-term complications. Careful patient selection is required to maximize benefits and minimize morbidity.

Minimally invasive enucleation versus open enucleation for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic neoplasms: Effects on clinical outcomes and quality of life

Introduction

The efficacy and safety of minimally invasive pancreatic enucleation (PE) have rarely been investigated. This study aimed to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive enucleation (MIEn) with those of open enucleation (OEn) for benign/low-grade malignant pancreatic neoplasms.

Patients and Methods

Data collected from patients who underwent PE between January 2011 and June 2020 at our centre were analysed.

Results

Forty-two patients who underwent MIEn (10 - robot-assisted and 32 - laparoscopic) and 47 who underwent OEn were included in this study. Compared with the OEn group, the MIEn group showed shorter operation time (147.6 ± 71.3 min vs. 183.1 ± 64.3 min), shorter post-operative hospital stay (11.5 ± 3.9 days vs. 13.4 ± 4.2 days), shorter off-bed activity time (2.9 ± 0.9 days vs. 3.7 ± 1.0 days) and lower estimated blood loss (EBL) (118.5 ± 59.2 mL vs. 153.1 ± 85.0 mL). Overall complication rate (47.6% vs. 55.3%), overall post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rate (40.5% vs. 44.7%) and Grade B + C POPF rate (11.9% vs. 19.1%) were similar in both the groups. For neoplasms located in the proximal pancreas, MIEn showed more favourable perioperative outcomes than OEn. Unlike MIEn for superficial neoplasms, MIEn for neoplasms deeply embedded in the pancreas resulted in a longer operative time and tended to increase EBL and the incidence of complications and POPF. During the follow-up period, no significant differences were observed between these two groups in terms of pancreatic function or quality of life.

Conclusions

Compared to OEn, MIEn is effective and safe for patients with benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic neoplasms. However, MIEn for embedded pancreatic neoplasms is recommended only in experienced centres because of the high rates of complications and POPF.

Minimally-invasive versus open pancreatic enucleation: systematic review and metanalysis of short-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Enucleation, either laparoscopic or robot-assisted, is rarely performed. The aim of this study was to offer the current available evidence about the outcomes of minimally invasive pancreatic enucleations and explore the possible advantage of this approach over traditional surgery.

METHODS

PubMed (MEDLINE), Cochrane Library and Embase (ELSEVIER) medical databases were searched for articles published from January 1990 to March 2022. Studies which included more than 10 cases of minimally-invasive pancreatic enucleation were included. Data on the outcomes were synthetized and meta-analyzed when appropriate.

RESULTS

Twenty studies published between 2009 and 2022 with a total of 552 patients were included in the systematic review: three hundred fifty-one patients (63.5%) had a laparoscopic intervention, two hundred and one (36.5%) robot-assisted with a cumulative incidence of conversion rate of 5%. Minimally-invasive surgery was performed in 63% of cases on the body/tail of the Pancreas and in 37% of the cases on the head/uncinate process of the Pancreas. The cumulative post-operative 30 days - mortality rate was 0.2% and the major postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo III-IV-V) 35%. Clinically relevant pancreatic fistula was observed in 17% of the patients. Compared with the standardized open approach (n: 366 patients), mean length of hospital stay was significantly reduced in patients undergoing minimally invasive pancreatic enucleation (2.45 days, p = 0.003) with a favorable trend for post-operative major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo III-IV) (- 24% RR, p: 0.13). Operative time, blood loss and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula rate were comparable between the two groups. One hundred and fourteen robot-assisted enucleations entered in a subgroup analysis with comparable results to open surgery.

CONCLUSION

Minimally-Invasive approach for pancreatic enucleation is safe, feasible and offers short-term clinical outcomes comparable with open surgery. The potential benefit of robotic surgery will need to be verified in further studies.

Figures do matter: A literature review of 4587 robotic pancreatic resections and their implications on training

BACKGROUND

The use of robotic assistance in minimally invasive pancreatic resection is quickly growing.

METHODS

We present a systematic review of the literature regarding all types of robotic pancreatic resection (RPR). Our aim is to show for which procedures there is enough experience to permit safe training and provide an estimation of how many centers could serve as teaching institutions.

RESULTS

Sixty-four studies reporting on 4587 RPRs were analyzed. A total of 2598 pancreatoduodenectomies (PD) were reported by 28 centers from Europe (6/28; 21.4%), the Americas (11/28; 39.3%), and Asia (11/28; 39.3%). Six studies reported >100 robot PD (1694/2598; 65.2%). A total of 1618 distal pancreatectomies (DP) were reported by 29 centers from Europe (10/29; 34.5%), the Americas (10/29; 34.5%), and Asia (9/29; 31%). Five studies reported >100 robotic DP (748/1618; 46.2%). A total of 154 central pancreatectomies were reported by six centers from Europe (1/6; 16.7%), the Americas (2/6; 33.3%), and Asia (3/6; 50%). Only 49 total pancreatectomies were reported. Finally, 168 enucleations were reported in seven studies (with a mean of 15.4 cases per study). A single center reported on 60 enucleations (35.7%). Results of each type of robotic procedure are also presented.

CONCLUSIONS

Experience with RPR is still quite limited. Despite high case volume not being sufficient to warrant optimal training opportunities, it is certainly a key component of every successful training program and is a major criterion for fellowship accreditation. From this review, it appears that only PD and DP can currently be taught at few institutions worldwide.

Application of robots in general surgery

Background: Application of robotic surgery in the field of general surgery has been increasing. This paper is an overview of the current uses and future perspectives of robotic surgery in four major divisions—endocrine, upper gastrointestinal, hepato-biliary-pancreatic (HBP), and colorectal surgery.Current Concepts: In endocrine surgery, cosmetic advantage is the highest priority when selecting a surgical approach for thyroidectomy. Currently, the transaxillary route is the most common approach. The introduction of the single-port system could maximize the advantages of this technique. In upper gastrointestinal surgery, the use of robots has the advantage of better retrieval of lymph nodes, less bleeding, earlier discharge, and less complications than the laparoscopic approach. However, a more prospective comparative trial is required to confirm those findings. In the HBP field, the indications of robotic surgery have expanded, starting with cholecystectomy to more challenging procedures, such as donor hepatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy. Meticulous dissection using robots could provide benefits to patients. In colorectal surgery, robotic surgery is an excellent technical tool for minimally invasive surgeries for rectal cancers, especially in male patients with narrow, deep pelvises. However, further studies are required to confirm the impact of robotic surgery on rectal cancers.Discussion and Conclusion: Robots are used to provide optimal surgical outcomes. Investigating new technologies and innovative surgical procedures is the highly important for a surgeon in the era of minimally invasive surgery.

The Miami International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the first evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) before and during the International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR) meeting in Miami (March 2019).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

MIPR has seen rapid development in the past decade. Promising outcomes have been reported by early adopters from high-volume centers. Subsequently, multicenter series as well as randomized controlled trials were reported; however, guidelines for clinical practice were lacking.

METHODS

The Scottisch Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used, incorporating these 4 items: systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to answer clinical questions, whenever possible in PICO style, the GRADE approach for assessment of the quality of evidence, the Delphi method for establishing consensus on the developed recommendations, and the AGREE-II instrument for the assessment of guideline quality and external validation. The current guidelines are cosponsored by the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery, Pancreas Club, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgery, the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, and the Society of Surgical Oncology.

RESULTS

After screening 16,069 titles, 694 studies were reviewed, and 291 were included. The final 28 recommendations covered 6 topics; laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy, central pancreatectomy, pancreatoduodenectomy, as well as patient selection, training, learning curve, and minimal annual center volume required to obtain optimal outcomes and patient safety.

CONCLUSION

The IG-MIPR using SIGN methodology give guidance to surgeons, hospital administrators, patients, and medical societies on the use and outcome of MIPR as well as the approach to be taken regarding this challenging type of surgery.

Endoscopic placement of pancreatic stent for "Deep" pancreatic enucleations operative technique and preliminary experience at two high-volume centers

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic enucleation (PE) is a viable option for the removal of non-malignant pancreatic masses leading to complete preservation of organ function. Nevertheless, PE is associated with substantial rates of post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF), particularly when the mass is close to the main pancreatic duct (MPD). Preoperative stenting of the MPD may prevent its injury when performing PE. This paper describes a novel technique of "deep" PE preceded by endoscopic stenting of the MPD.

METHODS

From January 2017 to May 2019, patients with small pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors proximal to the MPD were candidates for PE with previous stenting of the MPD at the University of Verona, Italy, and at the UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California. The endoscopic stenting was scheduled either the day before or 3 weeks before surgery, depending on the participating institute.

RESULTS

Ten patients were included in this pilot study. The endoscopic procedure was successful and well tolerated in all cases. Open, laparoscopic and robotic PE were performed. Seven patients had surgical complications. Among these, six developed a post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF), but neither grade C fistulas nor disruptions of the MPD were detected. At pathology, a low grade pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor was confirmed in all cases.

CONCLUSION

In the setting of high-volume centers, this procedure is safe, and it is associated with acceptable short-term surgical morbidity. The preoperative stenting of the MPD might extend the surgical indications for PE.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Minimally Invasive Pancreatectomies for Solid Pseudopapillary Neoplasms of the Pancreas

OBJECTIVES

We report the first systematic review and meta-analysis on minimally invasive pancreatectomy (MIP) for solid pseudopapillary neoplasms (SPPN) of the pancreas.

METHODS

A systematic review of all studies reporting patient characteristics and outcomes of MIP for SPPN was conducted.

RESULTS

We reviewed 27 studies comprising 149 patients with SPPN managed via MIP. Five were comparative retrospective cohort studies, comprising 46 and 60 patients in the minimally-invasive and open groups, respectively. Tumor size was smaller in the minimally-invasive group (mean difference, -2.20; 95% confidence interval (CI), -3.09 to -1.32; P < 0.001). The MI group had lower intraoperative blood loss (mean difference, -180.19; 95% CI, -344.28 to -16.09; P = 0.03) and transfusion requirement (relative risk, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.06-0.94; P = 0.04), and a shorter time to diet (mean difference, -2.99; 95% CI, -3.96 to -2.03; P < 0.001) and length of stay (mean difference, -3.61; 95% CI, -6.98 to -0.24; P = 0.04). There was no significant difference in operating time, margin positivity, postoperative morbidity, and postoperative pancreatic fistula rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive pancreatectomy for SPPN is associated with decreased intraoperative blood loss and transfusion requirements and a shorter postoperative time to diet and hospital stay.

Does surgical approach affect outcomes of enucleation for benign and low-grade pancreatic tumors? An ACS-NSQIP evaluation

BACKGROUND

Enucleation of low-grade pancreatic tumors achieves oncological outcomes equivalent to resection but conserves parenchyma. Given strict selection criteria, we hypothesized that minimally-invasive (MI) enucleation is associated with decreased composite major morbidity (CMM) compared to open.

METHODS

Pancreas-targeted ACS NSQIP (2014 -2016) was queried for enucleation (CPT code: 48120) and analyzed by intended surgical approach regardless of conversion. The primary outcome was CMM, a validated 30-day composite metric of adverse events.

RESULTS

Enucleation was performed using an open (n = 71; 62.3%) or MI (n = 43; 37.7%) approach with 7 conversions (16.2%). Both cohorts had interchangeable baseline characteristics. No selection factors governing MI were identified. MI-enucleation reduced median length of stay (4 vs. 5 days; p = 0.003), whereas rates of CMM after open (24; 34%) and MIenucleation (12; 28%) were equivalent (p = 0.541). Multivariable analysis demonstrated an association between CMM and prolonged operative time (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.14 -6.74), female sex (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.16 -0.94), and ASA score <3 (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16 -0.96) but not surgical approach.

CONCLUSION

MI-enucleation was not associated with reduced 30-day CMM compared to open, whereas prolonged operating time and unmodifiable patient factors were correlated with adverse outcomes.

Robotic Single-Site Plus One Port: Pancreas Enucleation

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic approaches to enucleation of the pancreas have been frequently described. Here we present a case of robotic single-site plus one port pancreas enucleation. To our knowledge, this enucleation surgical technique is the first to be reported in the medical literature.

METHODS

A 46-year-old male patient without previous medical or surgical history was incidentally diagnosed with a pancreatic mass during evaluation of intermittent right flank pain. Robotic single-site plus one port pancreas enucleation was performed using the Da Vinci single-site surgical platform with one additional port on November 16, 2016. Usual robotic instruments such as hook, bipolar, and vessel sealer with endo-wrist function could be used to facilitate effective surgical procedure with the additional port. The resected specimen was delivered through the umbilicus and a drain was not inserted.

RESULTS

Total operation time was 124 min with total console time of 73 min. Estimated blood loss was 50 cm³. Final pathology result was neuroendocrine tumor, grade 1. The patient was discharged without any complications on postoperative day #4.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic single-site plus one port pancreas enucleation seems feasible with acceptable perioperative outcomes.

Robotic enucleations of pancreatic benign or low-grade malignant tumors: preliminary results and comparison with robotic demolitive resections

BACKGROUND

The incidental detection of benign to low-grade malignant small pancreatic neoplasms increased in the last decades. The surgical management of these patients is still under debate. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the safety and feasibility of robotic enucleations and to compare the outcomes with non-parenchymal sparing robotic resections.

METHODS

The study included a total of 25 patients. Nine of them underwent a robotic enucleation (EN Group) and 16 patients received a robotic demolitive resection (DR Group). Perioperative and medium-term outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Patients' baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups except for presence of symptoms and tumor size, due to the inclusion criteria. Operative time was significantly shorter and postoperative results were better for EN group, including a significant shorter hospitalization (5 vs. 8 days, p = 0.027), reduced pancreatic leaks (22% vs. 50%, p = 0.287) and a better preservation of glandular function (100% vs. 62.5%, p = 0.066). Mortality rate was zero in both groups, with all patients free from disease at a median follow-up of 18 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The risks of under/overtreatment remain still unavoidable for benign to low-grade malignant small pancreatic neoplasms. Simple enucleation should be performed whenever oncological appropriate, to achieve the best postoperative outcomes. The adoption of robotic technique might widen the indications for parenchymal sparing, minimally invasive surgery.

Ultrasound-Guided Robotic Enucleation of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs) are relatively rare neoplasms with a low to mild malignant potential. They can be further divided into functioning and nonfunctioning, according to their secretive activity. Surgery is an optimal approach, but the classic open approach is challenging, with some patients having long hospitalization and potentially life-threatening complications. The robotic approach for PanNETs may represent an option to optimize their management.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed our prospectively maintained databases from 2 high-volume Italian centers for pancreatic surgery. Demographics, pathological characteristics, perioperative outcome, and medium-term follow-up of patients who underwent robotic pancreatic enucleations were collected.

RESULTS

Twelve patients with final diagnosis of PanNET were included. The mean age of the patients was 53.8 years (25-77). The median body mass index was 26 (24-29). Three lesions were functioning insulinomas, while the others were nonfunctioning tumors. No deaths occurred. Mild postoperative complications occurred, except for 1 grade B pancreatic fistula. The mean postoperative stay was 3.9 days (2-5).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results confirm that robotic enucleation is a feasible and safe approach for the treatment of PanNETs, with short hospital stay and low incidence of morbidity.

Current Management of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: From Demolitive Surgery to Observation

Incidental diagnosis of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs) greatly increased in the last years. In particular, more frequent diagnosis of small PanNETs leads to many challenging clinical decisions. These tumors are mostly indolent, although a percentage (up to 39%) may reveal an aggressive behaviour despite the small size. Therefore, there is still no unanimity about the best management of tumor smaller than 2 cm. The risks of under/overtreatment should be carefully evaluated with the patient and balanced with the potential morbidities related to surgery. The importance of the Ki-67 index as a prognostic factor is still debated as well. Whenever technically feasible, parenchyma-sparing surgeries lead to the best chance of organ preservation. Lymphadenectomy seems to be another important prognostic issue and, according to recent findings, should be performed in noninsulinoma patients. In the case of enucleation of the lesion, a lymph nodal sampling should always be considered. The relatively recent introduction of minimally invasive techniques (robotic) is a valuable option to deal with these tumors. The current management of PanNETs is analysed throughout the many available published guidelines and evidences with the aim of helping clinicians in the difficult decision-making process.

Robotic versus standard open pancreatectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis comparison

Interest in robotic pancreatectomy has been greatly increasing over the last decade. However, evidence supporting the benefits of robotic over open pancreatectomy is still outstanding. This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic pancreatectomy compared with the conventional open surgical approach. Propensity score-matched (1:1) was used to balance age, sex, BMI, ASA, tumor size, and malignancy of 17 robotic pancreaticoduodenectomies (PD), 12 pancreatic enucleations (PE), and 28 distal pancreatectomies (DP); and was compared with the open standard approach. Robotic PD was associated with longer operative time (594 vs. 413 min; p = 0.03) and decreased blood loss (190 vs. 394 ml; p = 0.001). Robotic PE showed a lower mean length of hospital stay (8.4 vs. 12.8 days; p = 0.04) and, in addition, robotic DP showed less blood loss (175 vs. 375 ml; p = 0.01), less severe morbidities (7.14 vs. 17.9%; p = 0.02), and a reduced mean length of hospital stay (8.9 vs. 15.1; p = 0.001). Overall, conversion rate was 4 (7%). Robotic pancreatectomy is as safe and effective as the standard open surgical approach with reduced blood loss in PD and DP, length of hospital stay in PE and DP, and severe morbidity in DP.

Robotic enucleation of benign pancreatic tumors

Robot-assisted enucleation provides the dual benefits of a minimally-invasive technique and pancreatic parenchymal conservation to selected patients with functional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (F-pNETs) and serous cystadenomas. Insulinomas, the most common F-pNETs, are ideal candidates for enucleation when <2 cm given the 80% probability of being benign. Current evidence suggests enucleation for the following: benign, isolated lesions with a distance between tumor and main pancreatic duct ≥3 mm (no focal stricture or dilation), insulinomas, gastrinomas <2 cm, and nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NF-pNETs) <1-2 cm and low Ki67 mitotic index. Minimally-invasive enucleation is an imaging-dependent procedure that requires recognizable anatomic landmarks for successful completion, including tumor proximity to the pancreatic duct as well as localization relative to major structures such as the gastroduodenal artery, bile duct, and portal vein. Tumor localization often mandates intraoperative ultrasound aided by duplex studies of intratumoral blood flow and frozen section confirmation. Five patients have undergone robot-assisted enucleation at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center between January 2014 and January 2017 with median tumor diameter of 1.3 cm (0.9-1.7 cm) located in the pancreatic head [2] and tail [3]. Surgical indications included insulinoma [2] and NF-pNETs [3]. Median operative time was 204 min (range, 137-347 min) and estimated blood loss of 50 mL. There were no conversions to open or transfusions. Robotic enucleation is a safe and feasible technique that allows parenchymal conservation in a minimally-invasive setting, reducing operative time and length of stay with equivalent pathological outcomes compared to open surgery.