1
|
Timmerhuis HC, Jensen CW, Ngongoni RF, Baiocchi M, DeLong JC, Ohkuma R, Dua MM, Norton JA, Poultsides GA, Worth PJ, Visser BC. Postoperative outcomes and costs of laparoscopic versus robotic distal pancreatectomy: a propensity-matched analysis. Surg Endosc 2024; 38:2095-2105. [PMID: 38438677 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-10728-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2023] [Accepted: 01/28/2024] [Indexed: 03/06/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) has established advantages over the open approach. The costs associated with robotic DP (RDP) versus laparoscopic DP (LDP) make the robotic approach controversial. We sought to compare outcomes and cost of LDP and RDP using propensity matching analysis at our institution. METHODS Patients undergoing LDP or RDP between 2000 and 2021 were retrospectively identified. Patients were optimally matched using age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, body mass index, and tumor size. Between-group differences were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for continuous data, and the McNemar's test for categorical data. Outcomes included operative duration, conversion to open surgery, postoperative length of stay, pancreatic fistula rate, pseudocyst requiring intervention, and costs. RESULTS 298 patients underwent MIDP, 180 (60%) were laparoscopic and 118 (40%) were robotic. All RDPs were matched 1:1 to a laparoscopic case with absolute standardized mean differences for all matching covariates below 0.10, except for tumor type (0.16). RDP had longer operative times (268 vs 178 min, p < 0.01), shorter length of stay (2 vs 4 days, p < 0.01), fewer biochemical pancreatic leaks (11.9% vs 34.7%, p < 0.01), and fewer interventional radiological drainage (0% vs 5.9%, p = 0.01). The number of pancreatic fistulas (11.9% vs 5.1%, p = 0.12), collections requiring antibiotics or intervention (11.9% vs 5.1%, p = 0.12), and conversion rates (3.4% vs 5.1%, p = 0.72) were comparable between the two groups. The total direct index admission costs for RDP were 1.01 times higher than for LDP for FY16-19 (p = 0.372), and 1.33 times higher for FY20-22 (p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS Although RDP required longer operative times than LDP, postoperative stays were shorter. The procedure cost of RDP was modestly more expensive than LDP, though this was partially offset by reduced hospital stay and reintervention rate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hester C Timmerhuis
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Christopher W Jensen
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Rejoice F Ngongoni
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Michael Baiocchi
- Stanford Prevention Research Center and Departments of Statistics and Health Research and Policy, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Jonathan C DeLong
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Rika Ohkuma
- Department of Quality, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Monica M Dua
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Jeffrey A Norton
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - George A Poultsides
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Patrick J Worth
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Brendan C Visser
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
- Department of Surgery, Stanford Health Care & Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Acciuffi S, Hilal MA, Ferrari C, Al-Madhi S, Chouillard MA, Messaoudi N, Croner RS, Gumbs AA. Study International Multicentric Pancreatic Left Resections (SIMPLR): Does Surgical Approach Matter? Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:1051. [PMID: 38473411 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16051051] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2023] [Revised: 02/21/2024] [Accepted: 02/24/2024] [Indexed: 03/14/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive surgery is increasingly preferred for left-sided pancreatic resections. The SIMPLR study aims to compare open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches using propensity score matching analysis. METHODS This study included 258 patients with tumors of the left side of the pancreas who underwent surgery between 2016 and 2020 at three high-volume centers. The patients were divided into three groups based on their surgical approach and matched in a 1:1 ratio. RESULTS The open group had significantly higher estimated blood loss (620 mL vs. 320 mL, p < 0.001), longer operative time (273 vs. 216 min, p = 0.003), and longer hospital stays (16.9 vs. 6.81 days, p < 0.001) compared to the laparoscopic group. There was no difference in lymph node yield or resection status. When comparing open and robotic groups, the robotic procedures yielded a higher number of lymph nodes (24.9 vs. 15.2, p = 0.011) without being significantly longer. The laparoscopic group had a shorter operative time (210 vs. 340 min, p < 0.001), shorter ICU stays (0.63 vs. 1.64 days, p < 0.001), and shorter hospital stays (6.61 vs. 11.8 days, p < 0.001) when compared to the robotic group. There was no difference in morbidity or mortality between the three techniques. CONCLUSION The laparoscopic approach exhibits short-term benefits. The three techniques are equivalent in terms of oncological safety, morbidity, and mortality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Acciuffi
- Department of General-, Visceral-, Vascular- and Transplantation Surgery, University of Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Hepatobiliopancreatic, Robotic and Minimally Invasive Surgery Unit, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Via Bissolati 57, 25124 Brescia, Italy
| | - Clarissa Ferrari
- Research and Clinical Trials Office, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Via Bissolati 57, 25124 Brescia, Italy
| | - Sara Al-Madhi
- Department of General-, Visceral-, Vascular- and Transplantation Surgery, University of Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Marc-Anthony Chouillard
- Hepatobiliopancreatic Surgery, Université de Paris Cité, 85 boulevard Saint-Germain, 75006 Paris, France
| | - Nouredin Messaoudi
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel and Europe Hospitals, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Roland S Croner
- Department of General-, Visceral-, Vascular- and Transplantation Surgery, University of Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Andrew A Gumbs
- Department of General-, Visceral-, Vascular- and Transplantation Surgery, University of Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany
- Department of Advanced & Minimally Invasive Surgery, American Hospital of Tbilisi, 17 Ushangi Chkheidze Street, Tbilisi 0102, Georgia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ding H, Kawka M, Gall TMH, Wadsworth C, Habib N, Nicol D, Cunningham D, Jiao LR. Robotic Distal Pancreatectomy Yields Superior Outcomes Compared to Laparoscopic Technique: A Single Surgeon Experience of 123 Consecutive Cases. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:5492. [PMID: 38001752 PMCID: PMC10669937 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15225492] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2023] [Revised: 11/03/2023] [Accepted: 11/18/2023] [Indexed: 11/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Technical limitations of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), in comparison to robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP), may translate to high conversion rates and morbidity. LDP and RDP procedures performed between December 2008 and January 2023 in our tertiary referral hepatobiliary and pancreatic centres were analysed and compared with regard to short-term outcomes. A total of 62 consecutive LDP cases and 61 RDP cases were performed. There was more conversion to open surgeries in the laparoscopic group compared with the robotic group (21.0% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.001). The LDP group also had a higher rate of postoperative complications (43.5% vs. 23.0%, p = 0.005). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of major complication or pancreatic fistular after operations (p = 0.20 and p = 0.71, respectively). For planned spleen-preserving operations, the RDP group had a shorter mean operative time (147 min vs. 194 min, p = 0.015) and a reduced total length of hospital stay compared with the LDP group (4 days vs. 7 days, p = 0.0002). The failure rate for spleen preservation was 0% in RDP and 20% (n = 5/25) in the LDP group (p = 0.009). RDP offered a better method for splenic preservation with Kimura's technique compared with LDP to avoid the risk of splenic infarction and gastric varices related to ligation and division of splenic pedicles. RDP should be the standard operation for the resection of pancreatic tumours at the body and tail of the pancreas without involving the celiac axis or common hepatic artery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hao Ding
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, Exhibition Road, South Kensington, London SW7 2BU, UK; (H.D.); (M.K.); (T.M.H.G.)
| | - Michal Kawka
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, Exhibition Road, South Kensington, London SW7 2BU, UK; (H.D.); (M.K.); (T.M.H.G.)
| | - Tamara M. H. Gall
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, Exhibition Road, South Kensington, London SW7 2BU, UK; (H.D.); (M.K.); (T.M.H.G.)
- Department of Surgery and Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital, 203 Fulham Road, London SW3 6JJ, UK; (D.N.); (D.C.)
| | - Chris Wadsworth
- Department of Gastroenterology and Surgery, The Hammersmith Hospital, Du Cane Road, London W12 0HS, UK; (C.W.); (N.H.)
| | - Nagy Habib
- Department of Gastroenterology and Surgery, The Hammersmith Hospital, Du Cane Road, London W12 0HS, UK; (C.W.); (N.H.)
| | - David Nicol
- Department of Surgery and Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital, 203 Fulham Road, London SW3 6JJ, UK; (D.N.); (D.C.)
| | - David Cunningham
- Department of Surgery and Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital, 203 Fulham Road, London SW3 6JJ, UK; (D.N.); (D.C.)
| | - Long R. Jiao
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, Exhibition Road, South Kensington, London SW7 2BU, UK; (H.D.); (M.K.); (T.M.H.G.)
- Department of Surgery and Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital, 203 Fulham Road, London SW3 6JJ, UK; (D.N.); (D.C.)
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
van Bodegraven EA, Francken MFG, Verkoulen KCHA, Abu Hilal M, Dijkgraaf MGW, Besselink MG. Costs of complications following distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review. HPB (Oxford) 2023; 25:1145-1150. [PMID: 37391314 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2023.03.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2022] [Revised: 03/01/2023] [Accepted: 03/06/2023] [Indexed: 07/02/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Postoperative complications following distal pancreatectomy (DP) are common, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). In order to design adequate prophylactic strategies, it is of relevance to determine the costs of these complications. An overview of the literature on the costs of complications following DP is lacking. METHODS A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library (inception until 1 August 2022). The primary outcome was the costs (i.e. cost differential) of major morbidity, individual complications and prolonged hospital stay. Quality of non-RCTs were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Costs were compared with the use of Purchasing Power parity. This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021223019). RESULTS Overall, seven studies were included with 854 patients after DP. The rate POPF grade B/C varied between 13% and 27% (based on five studies) with a corresponding cost differential of EUR 18,389 (based on two studies). The rate of severe morbidity varied between 13% and 38% (based on five studies) with a corresponding cost differential of EUR 19,281 (based on five studies). CONCLUSION This systematic review reported considerable costs for POPF grade B/C and severe morbidity after DP. Prospective databases and studies should report on all complications in a uniform matter to better display the economic burden of complications of DP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eduard A van Bodegraven
- Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Michiel F G Francken
- Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Koen C H A Verkoulen
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht Universitair Medisch Centrum, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Mohammad Abu Hilal
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Marcel G W Dijkgraaf
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy; Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Quijano Y, Vicente E, Ferri V, Naldini C, Pizzuti G, Caruso R. Robot-assisted Nissen fundoplication with the new HUGO™ Robotic assisted system: First worldwide report with system description, docking settings and video. Int J Surg Case Rep 2023; 106:108178. [PMID: 37060760 PMCID: PMC10139878 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijscr.2023.108178] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2023] [Revised: 03/24/2023] [Accepted: 03/24/2023] [Indexed: 04/17/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Robotic surgery has gained worldwide acceptance over the past decade, with several studies showing that this technique is safe and feasible. METHODS We describe the first robot-assisted Nissen fundoplication for hiatal hernia performed with the new Hugo™ RAS (Robotic assisted surgery) system (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) in Spain. The innovation of this system is the open surgical console with a 3D-HD display, a system tower and four independent arm carts. RESULTS The surgical procedures were completed without conversion. No intraoperative complications or technical failures of the system were recorded. The operative time was 97 min, the docking time was 3 min, and the length of hospital stay was three days. CONCLUSIONS This case report shows the safety and feasibility of Nissen fundoplication for hiatal hernia with the Hugo™ RAS system and provides relevant data that may assist early adopters of this surgical platform.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yolanda Quijano
- Sanchinarro University Hospital, General Surgery Department, San Pablo University, CEU, Madrid, Spain
| | - Emilio Vicente
- Sanchinarro University Hospital, General Surgery Department, San Pablo University, CEU, Madrid, Spain
| | - Valentina Ferri
- Sanchinarro University Hospital, General Surgery Department, San Pablo University, CEU, Madrid, Spain
| | - Chiara Naldini
- Sanchinarro University Hospital, General Surgery Department, San Pablo University, CEU, Madrid, Spain
| | - Giada Pizzuti
- Sanchinarro University Hospital, General Surgery Department, San Pablo University, CEU, Madrid, Spain
| | - Riccardo Caruso
- Sanchinarro University Hospital, General Surgery Department, San Pablo University, CEU, Madrid, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Emmen AMLH, Görgec B, Zwart MJW, Daams F, Erdmann J, Festen S, Gouma DJ, van Gulik TM, van Hilst J, Kazemier G, Lof S, Sussenbach SI, Tanis PJ, Zonderhuis BM, Busch OR, Swijnenburg RJ, Besselink MG. Impact of shifting from laparoscopic to robotic surgery during 600 minimally invasive pancreatic and liver resections. Surg Endosc 2023; 37:2659-2672. [PMID: 36401105 PMCID: PMC10082117 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09735-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2022] [Accepted: 10/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many centers worldwide are shifting from laparoscopic to robotic minimally invasive hepato-pancreato-biliary resections (MIS-HPB) but large single center series assessing this process are lacking. We hypothesized that the introduction of robot-assisted surgery was safe and feasible in a high-volume center. METHODS Single center, post-hoc assessment of prospectively collected data including all consecutive MIS-HPB resections (January 2010-February 2022). As of December 2018, all MIS pancreatoduodenectomy and liver resections were robot-assisted. All surgeons had participated in dedicated training programs for laparoscopic and robotic MIS-HPB. Primary outcomes were in-hospital/30-day mortality and Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 complications. RESULTS Among 1875 pancreatic and liver resections, 600 (32%) were MIS-HPB resections. The overall rate of conversion was 4.3%, Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 complications 25.7%, and in-hospital/30-day mortality 1.8% (n = 11). When comparing the period before and after the introduction of robotic MIS-HPB (Dec 2018), the overall use of MIS-HPB increased from 25.3 to 43.8% (P < 0.001) and blood loss decreased from 250 ml [IQR 100-500] to 150 ml [IQR 50-300] (P < 0.001). The 291 MIS pancreatic resections included 163 MIS pancreatoduodenectomies (52 laparoscopic, 111 robotic) with 4.3% conversion rate. The implementation of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with reduced operation time (450 vs 361 min; P < 0.001), reduced blood loss (350 vs 200 ml; P < 0.001), and a decreased rate of delayed gastric emptying (28.8% vs 9.9%; P = 0.009). The 309 MIS liver resections included 198 laparoscopic and 111 robotic procedures with a 3.6% conversion rate. The implementation of robotic liver resection was associated with less overall complications (24.7% vs 10.8%; P = 0.003) and shorter hospital stay (4 vs 3 days; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION The introduction of robotic surgery was associated with greater implementation of MIS-HPB in up to nearly half of all pancreatic and liver resections. Although mortality and major morbidity were not affected, robotic surgery was associated with improvements in some selected outcomes. Ultimately, randomized studies and high-quality registries should determine its added value.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anouk. M. L. H. Emmen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B. Görgec
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M. J. W. Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - F. Daams
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J. Erdmann
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S. Festen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - D. J. Gouma
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - T. M. van Gulik
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J. van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G. Kazemier
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S. Lof
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S. I. Sussenbach
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P. J. Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B. M. Zonderhuis
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - O. R. Busch
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - R. J. Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M. G. Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - for HPB-Amsterdam
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis including patient subgroups. Surg Endosc 2023:10.1007/s00464-023-09894-y. [PMID: 36781467 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-09894-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2022] [Accepted: 01/15/2023] [Indexed: 02/15/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RDP) has been suggested to hold some benefits over laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) but consensus and data on specific subgroups are lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis reports the surgical and oncological outcome and costs between RDP and LDP including subgroups with intended spleen preservation and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS Studies comparing RDP and LDP were included from PubMed, Cochrane Central Register, and Embase (inception-July 2022). Primary outcomes were conversion and unplanned splenectomy. Secondary outcomes were R0 resection, lymph node yield, major morbidity, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, in-hospital mortality, operative costs, total costs and hospital stay. RESULTS Overall, 43 studies with 6757 patients were included, 2514 after RDP and 4243 after LDP. RDP was associated with a longer operative time (MD = 18.21, 95% CI 2.18-34.24), less blood loss (MD = 54.50, 95% CI - 84.49-24.50), and a lower conversion rate (OR = 0.44, 95% CI 0.36-0.55) compared to LDP. In spleen-preserving procedures, RDP was associated with more Kimura procedures (OR = 2.23, 95% CI 1.37-3.64) and a lower rate of unplanned splenectomies (OR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.24-0.42). In patients with PDAC, RDP was associated with a higher lymph node yield (MD = 3.95, 95% CI 1.67-6.23), but showed no difference in the rate of R0 resection (OR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.67-1.37). RDP was associated with higher total (MD = 3009.31, 95% CI 1776.37-4242.24) and operative costs (MD = 3390.40, 95% CI 1981.79-4799.00). CONCLUSIONS RDP was associated with a lower conversion rate, a higher spleen preservation rate and, in patients with PDAC, a higher lymph node yield and similar R0 resection rate, as compared to LDP. The potential benefits of RDP need to be weighed against the higher total and operative costs in future randomized trials.
Collapse
|
8
|
Ielpo B, Podda M, Burdio F, Sanchez-Velazquez P, Guerrero MA, Nuñez J, Toledano M, Morales-Conde S, Mayol J, Lopez-Cano M, Espín-Basany E, Pellino G. Cost-Effectiveness of Robotic vs. Laparoscopic Surgery for Different Surgical Procedures: Protocol for a Prospective, Multicentric Study (ROBOCOSTES). Front Surg 2022; 9:866041. [PMID: 36227017 PMCID: PMC9549953 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.866041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2022] [Accepted: 03/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The studies which address the impact of costs of robotic vs. laparoscopic approach on quality of life (cost-effectiveness studies) are scares in general surgery. Methods The Spanish national study on cost-effectiveness differences among robotic and laparoscopic surgery (ROBOCOSTES) is designed as a prospective, multicentre, national, observational study. The aim is to determine in which procedures robotic surgery is more cost-effective than laparoscopic surgery. Several surgical operations and patient populations will be evaluated (distal pancreatectomy, gastrectomy, sleeve gastrectomy, inguinal hernioplasty, rectal resection for cancer, Heller cardiomiotomy and Nissen procedure). Discussion The results of this study will demonstrate which treatment (laparoscopic or robotic) and in which population is more cost-effective. This study will also assess the impact of previous surgical experience on main outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benedetto Ielpo
- Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain
- *Correspondence: Benedetto Ielpo
| | - Mauro Podda
- Department of Surgical Science, Emergency Surgery Unit, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Fernando Burdio
- Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Maria-Alejandra Guerrero
- Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Javier Nuñez
- IVEC (Instituto de Validación de la Eficiencia Clínica), Fundación de Investigación HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
| | - Miguel Toledano
- General Surgery Department, University Hospital Rio Hortega, Valladolid, Spain
| | - Salvador Morales-Conde
- Unit of Innovation in Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University Hospital Virgen del Rocio, University of Seville, Seville, Spain
| | - Julio Mayol
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Clinico San Carlos, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - Manuel Lopez-Cano
- Abdominal Wall Surgery Unit, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, UAB, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Eloy Espín-Basany
- Colorectal Surgery, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, UAB, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Gianluca Pellino
- Colorectal Surgery, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, UAB, Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, Università degli Studi della Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, Naples, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Scognamiglio P, Stüben BO, Heumann A, Li J, Izbicki JR, Perez D, Reeh M. Advanced Robotic Surgery: Liver, Pancreas, and Esophagus - The State of the Art? Visc Med 2022; 37:505-510. [PMID: 35087901 DOI: 10.1159/000519753] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2021] [Accepted: 09/17/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The trend in performing robotic-assisted operations in visceral surgery has been increasing in the last decade, also reaching the challenging field of hepatic, pancreatic, and esophageal surgery. Nevertheless, solid data about advantages and disadvantages of the robotic approach are still missing. The aim of this review is to analyze the benefit and impact of robotic surgery in the field of hepatic, pancreatic, and esophageal surgery, focusing on the comparison with the conventional laparoscopic or open approach. Summary The well-known advantages of laparoscopic surgery in comparison to the open approach are also valid for robotic surgery, with the addition of a 3D-view camera, wristed instrumentation, and an ergonomic console. On the other hand, the use of a robotic system leads to longer operating time and higher costs. Randomized controlled trials comparing the robotic approach with the laparoscopic one are still missing. Key Message Recent meta-analyses show promising results of the usage of robotic systems in advanced surgical procedures, like hepatic, pancreatic, and esophageal resections. Further randomized studies are needed to validate the postulated benefit.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pasquale Scognamiglio
- Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Björn-Ole Stüben
- Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Asmus Heumann
- Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Jun Li
- Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Jakob R Izbicki
- Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Daniel Perez
- Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Matthias Reeh
- Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|