1
|
Napoli N, Kauffmann EF, Ginesini M, Di Dato A, Viti V, Gianfaldoni C, Lami L, Cappelli C, Rotondo MI, Campani D, Amorese G, Vivaldi C, Cesario S, Bernardini L, Vasile E, Vistoli F, Boggi U. Robotic Versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy With Vein Resection and Reconstruction: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis. ANNALS OF SURGERY OPEN 2024; 5:e409. [PMID: 38911629 PMCID: PMC11191888 DOI: 10.1097/as9.0000000000000409] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2024] [Accepted: 02/23/2024] [Indexed: 06/25/2024] Open
Abstract
Objective This study aimed to compare robotic pancreatoduodenectomy with vein resection (PD-VR) based on the incidence of severe postoperative complications (SPC). Background Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy has been gaining momentum in recent years. Vein resection is frequently required in this operation, but no study has compared robotic and open PD-VR using a matched analysis. Methods This was an intention-to-treat study designed to demonstrate the noninferiority of robotic to open PD-VR (2011-2021) based on SPC. To achieve a power of 80% (noninferiority margin:10%; α error: 0.05; ß error: 0.20), a 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis required 35 pairs. Results Of the 151 patients with PD-VR (open = 115, robotic = 36), 35 procedures per group were compared. Elective conversion to open surgery was required in 1 patient with robotic PD-VR (2.9%). One patient in both groups experienced partial vein thrombosis. SPC occurred in 7 (20.0%) and 6 patients (17.1%) in the robotic and open PD-VR groups, respectively (P = 0.759; OR: 1.21 [0.36-4.04]). Three patients died after robotic PD-VR (8.6%) and none died after open PD-VR (P = 0.239). Robotic PD-VR was associated with longer operative time (611.1 ± 13.9 minutes vs 529.0 ± 13.0 minutes; P < 0.0001), more type 2 vein resection (28.6% vs 5.7%; P = 0.0234) and less type 3 vein resection (31.4% vs 71.4%; P = 0.0008), longer vein occlusion time (30 [25.3-78.3] minutes vs 15 [8-19.5] minutes; P = 0.0098), less blood loss (450 [200-750] mL vs 733 [500-1070.3] mL; P = 0.0075), and fewer blood transfusions (intraoperative: 14.3% vs 48.6%; P = 0.0041) (perioperative: 14.3% vs 60.0%; P = 0.0001). Conclusions In this study, robotic PD-VR was noninferior to open PD-VR for SPC. Robotic and open PD-VR need to be compared in randomized controlled trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Niccolò Napoli
- From the Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | | | - Michael Ginesini
- From the Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Armando Di Dato
- From the Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Virginia Viti
- From the Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Cesare Gianfaldoni
- From the Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Lucrezia Lami
- From the Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Carla Cappelli
- Division of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy
| | | | | | - Gabriella Amorese
- Division of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy
| | - Caterina Vivaldi
- Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Silvia Cesario
- Division of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy
| | - Laura Bernardini
- Division of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy
| | - Enrico Vasile
- Division of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy
| | - Fabio Vistoli
- From the Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Ugo Boggi
- From the Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Zecchin Ferrara V, Martinino A, Toti F, Schilirò D, Pinto F, Giovinazzo F. Robotic Vascular Resection in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review. J Clin Med 2024; 13:2000. [PMID: 38610766 PMCID: PMC11012275 DOI: 10.3390/jcm13072000] [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: 02/27/2024] [Revised: 03/25/2024] [Accepted: 03/26/2024] [Indexed: 04/14/2024] Open
Abstract
(1) Background: This study comprehensively compared robotic pancreatic surgery with vascular resection (RPS-VR) to other surgical procedures in the treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). (2) Methods: A systematic review of relevant literature was conducted to assess a range of crucial surgical and oncological outcomes. (3) Results: Findings indicate that robotic surgery with vascular resections (VRs) significantly prolongs the duration of surgery compared to other surgical procedures, and they notably demonstrate an equal hospital stay. While some studies reported a lower conversion rate and a higher rate of blood loss and blood transfusion in the RPS-VR group, others found no significant disparity. Furthermore, RPS-VR consistently correlated with comparable recurrence rates, free margins R0, postoperative mortality, and complication rates. Concerning the last one, certain reviews reported a higher rate of major complications. Overall survival and disease-free survival remained comparable between the RPS-VR and other surgical techniques in treating PDAC. (4) Conclusions: The analysis emphasizes how RPS-VR is a resembling approach in terms of surgical outcomes and aligns with existing literature findings in this field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Francesco Toti
- Department of Surgery, ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, 20100 Milan, Italy
| | - Davide Schilirò
- Department of Surgery, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA (D.S.)
| | - Federico Pinto
- Department of Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL 60607, USA
| | - Francesco Giovinazzo
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, 00131 Rome, Italy
- Department of Health Sciences, UniCamillus-Saint Camillus International University, 00131 Rome, Italy
- Department of Surgery, Saint Camillus Hospital, 31100 Treviso, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Shyr BS, Shyr YM, Chen SC, Wang SE, Shyr BU. Reappraisal of surgical and survival outcomes of 500 consecutive cases of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. JOURNAL OF HEPATO-BILIARY-PANCREATIC SCIENCES 2024; 31:99-109. [PMID: 37881144 DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.1383] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/27/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The role of the robotic approach for pancreaticoduodenectomy has not been well established with robust data. This study aimed to reappraise feasibility and justification of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) over time. METHODS A total of 500 patients undergoing RPD were enrolled and divided into early (first 250 patients) and late (last 250 patients) groups for a comparative study. RESULTS The conversion rate was 8.8% overall and was significantly lower in the late group (5.6% vs. 12.0%; p = .012). The overall median intraoperative blood loss was 130 mL. Radicality of resection was similar between early and late groups. The overall surgical mortality after RPD was 1.3%. The overall surgical morbidity and major complication was 44.1% and 13.2%, respectively, and similar between early and late groups. Chyle leakage was the most common complication after RPD (25.0%), followed by postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The POPF rate was 8.6% overall, with 5.9% in the early group and 11.0% in the late group, p = .051. The overall delayed gastric emptying rate was 3.5%. The late group had better survival outcomes than those of the early group after RPD for ampullary adenocarcinoma (p = .027) but not for pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. CONCLUSIONS Reappraisal of this study has confirmed that RPD is not only technically feasible without increasing surgical risks but also oncologically justified without compromising survival outcomes for both pancreatic head and other periampullary cancers over time. Moreover, RPD is associated with the benefits of low surgical mortality, blood loss, and delayed gastric emptying.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bor-Shiuan Shyr
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
| | - Yi-Ming Shyr
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
| | - Shih-Chin Chen
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
| | - Shin-E Wang
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
| | - Bor-Uei Shyr
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
McCarron FN, Yoshino O, Müller PC, Wang H, Wang Y, Ricker A, Mantha R, Driedger M, Beckman M, Clavien PA, Vrochides D, Martinie JB. Expanding the utility of robotics for pancreaticoduodenectomy: a 10-year review and comparison to international benchmarks in pancreatic surgery. Surg Endosc 2023; 37:9591-9600. [PMID: 37749202 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-10426-x] [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: 04/04/2023] [Accepted: 08/31/2023] [Indexed: 09/27/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) is an emerging alternative to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). Although RPD offers various theoretical advantages, it is used in less than 10% of all pancreaticoduodenectomies. The aim of this study was to report our 10-year experience and compare RPD outcomes with international benchmarks for OPD. METHODS A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained institutional database was performed of consecutive patients who underwent RPD between January 2011 and December 2021. Patients were categorized into low-risk and high-risk groups according to the selection criteria set by the benchmark study. Their outcomes were compared to the international benchmark cut off values. Outcomes were then evaluated over time to identify improvements in practice and establish a learning curve. RESULTS Of 201 RPDs, 36 were low-risk and 165 high-risk patients. Compared to the OPD benchmarks, outcomes of low-risk patients were within the cutoff values. High-risk patients were outside the cutoff for blood transfusions (26% vs. ≤ 23%), overall complications (78% vs. ≤ 73%), grade I-II complications (68% vs. ≤ 62%), and readmissions (22% vs ≤ 21%). Oncologic outcomes for high-risk patients were within benchmark cutoffs. Cases at the end of the learning curve included more pancreatic cancer (42% from 17%) and fewer low-risk patients (10% from 24%) than those at the beginning. After 41 RPD there was a decline in conversion rates and operative time. Between 95 and 143 cases operative time, transfusion rates, and LOS declined significantly. Complications did not differ over time. CONCLUSION RPD yields results comparable to the established benchmarks in OPD in both low- and high-risk patients. Along the learning curve, RPD evolved with the inclusion of more high-risk cases while outcomes remained within benchmarks. Addition of a robotic HPB surgery fellowship did not compromise outcomes. These results suggest that RPD may be an option for high-risk patients at specialized centers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frances N McCarron
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA.
- Division of Hepatobiliary & Pancreas Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, 1025 Morehead Medical Dr., Suite 600, Charlotte, NC, 2820, USA.
| | - Osamu Yoshino
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Philip C Müller
- Department of Surgery, Swiss HPB and Transplantation Centre, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Huaping Wang
- Department of Surgery, Carolinas Center for Surgical Outcomes, Wake Forest Center for Biomedical Informatics, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Yifan Wang
- Division of HPB and Transplantation, Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Ansley Ricker
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Rohit Mantha
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Michael Driedger
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Michael Beckman
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Pierre-Alain Clavien
- Department of Surgery, Swiss HPB and Transplantation Centre, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Dionisios Vrochides
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - John B Martinie
- Division of HPB Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kauffmann EF, Napoli N, Ginesini M, Gianfaldoni C, Asta F, Salamone A, Ripolli A, Di Dato A, Vistoli F, Amorese G, Boggi U. Tips and tricks for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy with superior mesenteric/portal vein resection and reconstruction. Surg Endosc 2023; 37:3233-3245. [PMID: 36624216 PMCID: PMC10082118 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09860-0] [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: 08/28/2022] [Accepted: 12/27/2022] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Open pancreatoduodenectomy with vein resection (OPD-VR) is now standard of care in patients who responded to neoadjuvant therapies. Feasibility of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) with vein resection (RPD-VR) was shown, but no study provided a detailed description of the technical challenges associated with this formidable operation. Herein, we describe the trips and tricks for technically successful RPD-VR. METHODS The vascular techniques used in RPD-VR were borrowed from OPD-VR, as well as from our experience with robotic transplantation of both kidney and pancreas. Vein resection was classified into 4 types according to the international study group of pancreatic surgery. Each type of vein resection was described in detail and shown in a video. RESULTS Between October 2008 and November 2021, a total of 783 pancreatoduodenectomies were performed, including 233 OPDs-VR (29.7%). RPD was performed in 256 patients (32.6%), and RPDs-VR in 36 patients (4.5% of all pancreatoduodenectomies; 15.4% of all pancreatoduodenectomies with vein resection; 14.0% of all RPDs). In RPD-VR vein resections were: 4 type 1 (11.1%), 10 type 2 (27.8%), 12 type 3 (33.3%) and 10 type 4 (27.8%). Vascular patches used in type 2 resections were made of peritoneum (n = 8), greater saphenous vein (n = 1), and deceased donor aorta (n = 1). Interposition grafts used in type 4 resections were internal left jugular vein (n = 8), venous graft from deceased donor (n = 1) and spiral saphenous vein graft (n = 1). There was one conversion to open surgery (2.8%). Ninety-day mortality was 8.3%. There was one (2.8%) partial vein thrombosis, treated with heparin infusion. CONCLUSIONS We have reported 36 technically successful RPDs-VR. We hope that the tips and tricks provided herein can contribute to safer implementation of RPD-VR. Based on our experience, and according to data from the literature, we strongly advise that RPD-VR is performed by expert surgeons at high volume centers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emanuele F Kauffmann
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124, Pisa, Italy.
| | - Niccolò Napoli
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124, Pisa, Italy
| | - Michael Ginesini
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124, Pisa, Italy
| | - Cesare Gianfaldoni
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124, Pisa, Italy
| | - Fabio Asta
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124, Pisa, Italy
| | - Alice Salamone
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124, Pisa, Italy
| | - Allegra Ripolli
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124, Pisa, Italy
| | - Armando Di Dato
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124, Pisa, Italy
| | - Fabio Vistoli
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124, Pisa, Italy
| | - Gabriella Amorese
- Division of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy
| | - Ugo Boggi
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124, Pisa, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Kauffmann EF, Napoli N, Ginesini M, Gianfaldoni C, Asta F, Salamone A, Amorese G, Vistoli F, Boggi U. Feasibility of "cold" triangle robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc 2022; 36:9424-9434. [PMID: 35881243 PMCID: PMC9652209 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09411-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2022] [Accepted: 06/19/2022] [Indexed: 01/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Triangle pancreatoduodenectomy adds to the conventional procedure the en bloc removal of the retroperitoneal lympho-neural tissue included in the triangular area bounded by the common hepatic artery (CHA), the superior mesenteric artery (SMA), and the superior mesenteric vein/portal vein. We herein aim to show the feasibility of "cold" triangle robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (C-Tr-RPD) for pancreatic cancer (PDAC). METHODS Cold dissection corresponds to sharp arterial divestment performed using only the tips of robotic scissors. After division of the gastroduodenal artery, triangle dissection begins by lateral-to-medial divestment of the CHA and anterior-to-posterior clearance of the right side of the celiac trunk. Next, after a wide Kocher maneuver, the origin of the SMA, and the celiac trunk are identified. After mobilization of the first jejunal loop and attached mesentery, the SMA is identified at the level of the first jejunal vein and is divested along the right margin working in a distal-to-proximal direction. Vein resection and reconstruction can be performed as required. C-Tr-RPD was considered feasible if triangle dissection was successfully completed without conversion to open surgery or need to use energy devices. Postoperative complications and pathology results are presented in detail. RESULTS One hundred twenty-seven consecutive C-Tr-RPDs were successfully performed. There were three conversions to open surgery (2.3%), because of pneumoperitoneum intolerance (n = 2) and difficult digestive reconstruction. Thirty-four patients (26.7%) required associated vascular procedures. No pseudoaneurysm of the gastroduodenal artery was observed. Twenty-eight patients (22.0%) developed severe postoperative complications (≥ grade III). Overall 90-day mortality was 7.1%, declining to 2.3% after completion of the learning curve. The median number of examined lymph nodes was 42 (33-51). The rate of R1 resection (7 margins < 1 mm) was 44.1%. CONCLUSION C-Tr-RPD is feasible, carries a risk of surgical complications commensurate to the magnitude of the procedure, and improves staging of PDAC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emanuele F. Kauffmann
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, Italy
| | - Niccolò Napoli
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, Italy
| | - Michael Ginesini
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, Italy
| | - Cesare Gianfaldoni
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, Italy
| | - Fabio Asta
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, Italy
| | - Alice Salamone
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, Italy
| | - Gabriella Amorese
- Division of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy
| | - Fabio Vistoli
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, Italy
| | - Ugo Boggi
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Bahra M, Ossami Saidy RR. Current status of robotic surgery for hepato-pancreato-biliary malignancies. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2022; 22:939-946. [PMID: 35863758 DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2022.2105211] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Robotic surgery is an emerging aspect of gastrointestinal surgery. Hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery is currently being explored for a broad spectrum of indications, entities, and postoperative outcomes. Noninferiority and financial aspects are the focus of studies. In this review, the impact on oncological therapies is assessed. AREAS COVERED An extensive literature review was conducted, and relevant studies and articles and reviews for robotic surgery in the field of hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery were examined. Special attention was given to the oncological aspects of robotic surgery and its possible impact on the therapy of malignant neoplasms. EXPERT OPINION Robotic-assisted surgery for oncological indications is promising, in part, an established technique that has already shown its advantages in the last decade, although high-quality studies are missing. Upcoming experience must consider the oncological benefit and putative new indications in a rapidly changing field of anti-neoplastic regimens. Also, robotic surgery may possess the ability to accelerate digitalization and AI-based augmentation in this context.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marcus Bahra
- Krankenhaus Waldfriede, Akademisches Lehrkrankenhaus der Charité, Zentrum für Onkologische Oberbauchchirurgie und Robotik, Argentinische Allee 40, 14163 Berlin
| | - Ramin Raul Ossami Saidy
- Krankenhaus Waldfriede, Akademisches Lehrkrankenhaus der Charité, Zentrum für Onkologische Oberbauchchirurgie und Robotik, Argentinische Allee 40, 14163 Berlin
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
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
|
9
|
Zhang Z, Zhou B, Zheng X, Huang P, Yan S. Use of the peritoneum or the round ligament of the liver in radical surgery for pancreatic cancer. Gland Surg 2021; 10:3075-3081. [PMID: 34926223 PMCID: PMC8637067 DOI: 10.21037/gs-21-712] [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: 07/19/2021] [Accepted: 11/18/2021] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND At present, the materials commonly used for venous reconstruction in radical surgery for pancreatic cancer combined with vascular reconstruction include artificial blood vessels, autologous veins, and allogeneic blood vessels, but these materials all have their own disadvantages. In contrast, the use of the peritoneum and the round ligament of the liver for radical surgery for pancreatic cancer combined with vascular reconstruction provides new options. METHODS A retrospective descriptive study was performed. Clinical data were collected from 11 patients (5 males and 6 females with a median age of 62 years and an age range of 48-72 years) who underwent pancreatic cancer surgery combined with resection and reconstruction of the portal vein (PV) and superior mesenteric vein (SMV) using the peritoneum (including the round ligament of the liver) from November 2018 to November 2020 in the Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, and the Department of General Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Shaoxing University. Intraoperative conditions and postoperative conditions were observed. Data were analyzed using SPSS 19.0 Normally distributed measurement data are expressed as the mean ± SD, whereas nonnormally distributed measurement data are expressed as the median (range). Count data are expressed as absolute numbers. RESULTS (I) Intraoperative condition: all 11 patients completed the operation successfully, including total pancreatectomy (TP) in 4 patients and pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) in 7 patients. In the 11 patients, the duration of surgery was 503±183 min, and the volume of intraoperative bleeding was 332±268 mL. (II) Postoperative condition: of the 11 patients, 5 presented with complications, including pancreatic leak in 3 patients, bleeding in 1 patient, and thrombosis in 1 patient. Postoperative pathological examination showed that 10 of the 11 patients had adenocarcinoma, and 1 had a neuroendocrine tumor. CONCLUSIONS The peritoneum and the round ligament of the liver are feasible materials and provide clinical options for reconstruction of the PV and SMV.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhuoliang Zhang
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Shaoxing University, Shaoxing, China
| | - Bo Zhou
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China
| | - Xiang Zheng
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China
| | - Pengfei Huang
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China
| | - Sheng Yan
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Vascular resections in minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic cancer. LAPAROSCOPIC, ENDOSCOPIC AND ROBOTIC SURGERY 2021. [DOI: 10.1016/j.lers.2021.09.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
|
11
|
Nakata K, Nakamura M. The current status and future directions of robotic pancreatectomy. Ann Gastroenterol Surg 2021; 5:467-476. [PMID: 34337295 PMCID: PMC8316739 DOI: 10.1002/ags3.12446] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2020] [Revised: 01/19/2021] [Accepted: 01/28/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Robotic surgery has emerged as an alternative to laparoscopic surgery and it has also been applied to pancreatectomy. With the increase in the number of robotic pancreatectomies, several studies comparing robotic pancreatectomy and conventional open or laparoscopic pancreatectomy have been published. However, the use of robotic pancreatectomy remains controversial. In this review, we aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the current status of robotic pancreatectomy. Various aspects of robotic pancreatectomy and conventional open or laparoscopic pancreatectomy are compared, including the benefits, limitations, oncological efficacy, learning curves, and costs. Both robotic pancreatoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy have favorable or comparable outcomes to conventional procedures, and robotic pancreatectomy has the potential to be an alternative to open or laparoscopic procedures. However, there are still several disadvantages to robotic platforms, such as prolonged operative duration and the high cost of the procedure. These disadvantages will be improved by developing instruments, overcoming the learning curve, and increasing the number of robotic pancreatectomies. In addition, robotic pancreatectomy is still in the introductory period in most centers and should only be used in accordance with strict indications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kohei Nakata
- Department of Surgery and OncologyGraduate School of Medical SciencesKyushu UniversityFukuokaJapan
| | - Masafumi Nakamura
- Department of Surgery and OncologyGraduate School of Medical SciencesKyushu UniversityFukuokaJapan
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Abstract
Current evidence shows that robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) is feasible with a safety profile equivalent to either open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) or laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD). However, major intraoperative bleeding can occur and emergency conversion to OPD may be required. RPD reduces the risk of emergency conversion when compared to LPD. The learning curve of RPD ranges from 20 to 40 procedures, but proficiency is reached only after 250 operations. Once proficiency is achieved, the results of RPD may be superior to those of OPD. As for now, RPD is at least equivalent to OPD and LPD with respect to incidence and severity of POPF, incidence and severity of post-operative complications, and post-operative mortality. A minimal annual number of 20 procedures per center is recommended. In pancreatic cancer (versus OPD), RPD is associated with similar rates of R0 resections, but higher number of examined lymph nodes, lower blood loss, and lower need of blood transfusions. Multivariable analysis shows that RPD could improve patient survival. Data from selected centers show that vein resection and reconstruction is feasible during RPD, but at the price of high conversion rates and frequent use of small tangential resections. The true Achilles heel of RPD is higher operative costs that limit wider implementation of the procedure and accumulation of a large experience at most single centers. In conclusion, when proficiency is achieved, RPD may be superior to OPD with respect to CR-POPF and oncologic outcomes. Achievement of proficiency requires commitment, dedication, and truly high volumes.
Collapse
|