Oncologic Outcomes After Robotic Pancreatic Resections Are Not Inferior to Open Surgery. Ann Surg. 2019;. [PMID: 31663967 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000003615]

Role of minimally invasive surgery in the management of localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a review

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a highly lethal malignancy with a minority of patients eligible for curative-intent surgical intervention. Pancreatic resections are technically demanding operations associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPRs), which include laparoscopic and robotic approaches, may enhance postoperative outcomes by lessening physiological impact of open surgery. A limited number of randomized-controlled trials as well as numerous retrospective reports have focused on MIPR outcomes and role in management of a variety of tumors, including PDAC. Today, MIPRs are generally considered acceptable alternatives to open surgery as a trend towards improved short-term metrics is observed. However, several questions remain regarding the oncological adequacy of MIPR's as long-term experience is less extensive compared to open techniques. This review aims to summarize existing evidence on MIPRs with a focus on PDAC.

Robotic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma after the learning curve: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies have demonstrated that the learning curve plays an important role in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD). Although improved short-term outcomes of RPD after the learning curve have been reported compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD), there is a lack of long-term survival analyses.

METHODS

Patients who underwent curative intended RPD and OPD for pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma (PDAC) between January 2017 and June 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. A 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to balance the baseline characteristics between the RPD and OPD groups.

RESULTS

Of the 548 patients (108 RPD and 440 OPD), 103 RPD patients were matched with 206 OPD patients after PSM. There were 194 (62.8%) men and 115 (37.2%) women, with a median age of 64 (58-69) years. The median overall survival (OS) in the RPD group was 33.2 months compared with 25.7 months in the OPD group (p = 0.058, log-rank). The median disease-free survival (DFS) following RPD was longer than the OPD (18.5 vs. 14.0 months, p = 0.011, log-rank). The RPD group has a lower incidence of local recurrence compared the OPD group (36.9% vs. 51.2%, p = 0.071). Multivariate Cox analysis demonstrated that RPD was independently associated with improved OS (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.94, p = 0.019) and DFS (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.88, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

After the learning curve, RPD had improved oncologic outcomes in PDAC patients compared to OPD. Future prospective randomized clinical trials will be required to validate these findings.

Reappraisal of surgical and survival outcomes of 500 consecutive cases of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy

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.

Prince and princesses: The current status of robotic surgery in surgical oncology

Robotic surgery has experienced a dramatic increase in utilization across general surgery over the last two decades, including in surgical oncology. Although urologists and gynecologists were the first to show that this technology could be utilized in cancer surgery, the robot is now a powerful tool in the treatment of gastrointestinal, hepato-pancreatico-biliary, colorectal, endocrine, and soft tissue malignancies. While long-term outcomes are still pending, short-term outcomes have showed promise for this technologic advancement of cancer surgery.

The Feasibility, Proficiency, and Mastery Learning Curves in 635 Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomies Following a Multicenter Training Program: "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants"

OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) in "second-generation" RPD centers following a multicenter training program adhering to the IDEAL framework.

BACKGROUND

The long learning curves for RPD reported from "pioneering" expert centers may discourage centers interested in starting an RPD program. However, the feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves may be shorter in "second-generation" centers that participated in dedicated RPD training programs, although data are lacking. We report on the learning curves for RPD in "second-generation" centers trained in a dedicated nationwide program.

METHODS

Post hoc analysis of all consecutive patients undergoing RPD in 7 centers that participated in the LAELAPS-3 training program, each with a minimum annual volume of 50 pancreatoduodenectomies, using the mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (March 2016-December 2021). Cumulative sum analysis determined cutoffs for the 3 learning curves: operative time for the feasibility (1) risk-adjusted major complication (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III) for the proficiency, (2) and textbook outcome for the mastery, (3) learning curve. Outcomes before and after the cutoffs were compared for the proficiency and mastery learning curves. A survey was used to assess changes in practice and the most valued "lessons learned."

RESULTS

Overall, 635 RPD were performed by 17 trained surgeons, with a conversion rate of 6.6% (n=42). The median annual volume of RPD per center was 22.5±6.8. From 2016 to 2021, the nationwide annual use of RPD increased from 0% to 23% whereas the use of laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy decreased from 15% to 0%. The rate of major complications was 36.9% (n=234), surgical site infection 6.3% (n=40), postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B/C) 26.9% (n=171), and 30-day/in-hospital mortality 3.5% (n=22). Cutoffs for the feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves were reached at 15, 62, and 84 RPD. Major morbidity and 30-day/in-hospital mortality did not differ significantly before and after the cutoffs for the proficiency and mastery learning curves. Previous experience in laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy shortened the feasibility (-12 RPDs, -44%), proficiency (-32 RPDs, -34%), and mastery phase learning curve (-34 RPDs, -23%), but did not improve clinical outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves for RPD at 15, 62, and 84 procedures in "second-generation" centers after a multicenter training program were considerably shorter than previously reported from "pioneering" expert centers. The learning curve cutoffs and prior laparoscopic experience did not impact major morbidity and mortality. These findings demonstrate the safety and value of a nationwide training program for RPD in centers with sufficient volume.

Discrepancies in survival after conversion to open in minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

The extent by which conversion to open (CTO) during minimally invasive procedures for pancreatic cancer impact survival outcomes is not fully understood.

METHODS

The 2010-2017 National Cancer Database identified 12,424 non-metastatic patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma. Patients were stratified into three cohorts: open (OPD), completed MIPD (cMIPD), and CTO. Subgroups were dichotomized by hospital MIPD volume.

RESULTS

Across the study period, 80.6% of patients underwent OPD, 19.4% MIPD, and 24% were CTO. Median overall survival was worse after CTO (21.8 months) than for OPD (23.6 months) or cMIPD (25.2 months) (p < 0.001). Although this effect persisted for <10 MIPD/year, CTO did comparably to OPD at hospitals performing ≥10MIPD/year (CTO = 26.8 months, OPD = 27.9 months; p = 0.128). Ninety-day mortality after CTO was worse at ≤ 10 MIPD/year hospitals (9.3% vs. 2.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Short and long-term survival is impacted by CTO after MIPD, especially at lower surgical volumes, stressing careful adoption while ascending the learning curve.

Utilization of robotics in pediatric surgical oncology

Despite increasing implementation of robotic surgery and minimally invasive techniques within adult surgical oncology and pediatric general surgery, the utilization of robotic-assisted resections for pediatric tumors has been met with controversy. The robotic platform affords numerous advantages over conventional surgical techniques. However, limited data and guidelines regarding patient selection, indications for the robotic approach, and long-term oncologic outcomes have delayed the widespread adoption of robotic-assisted resection of pediatric tumors. This paper reviews the benefits, limitations, and existing guidelines and data regarding the utilization of robotics in pediatric surgical oncology.

The Impact of Preexisting Psychiatric Disorders on Outcomes After Pancreatic Cancer Surgery

OBJECTIVES

Comorbid psychiatric illness has been associated with worse outcomes after some major surgical procedures. We hypothesized that patients with preexisting mood disorders would have worse postoperative and oncologic outcomes after pancreatic cancer resection.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzed Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. A preexisting mood disorder was classified if a patient was diagnosed and/or treated with medication approved for depression/anxiety within 6 months before surgery.

RESULTS

Of 1305 patients, 16% had a preexisting mood disorder. Mood disorders had no impact on hospital length of stay (12.9 vs 13.2 days, P = 0.75), 30-day complications (26% vs 22%, P = 0.31), 30-day readmissions (26% vs 21%, P = 0.1), or mortality (30 days: 3% vs 4%, P = 0.35); only an increased 90-day readmissions rate (42% vs 31%, P = 0.001) was observed. No effect on adjuvant chemotherapy receipt (62.5% vs 69.2%, P = 0.06) or survival (24 months, 43% vs 39%, P = 0.44) was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Preexisting mood disorders influenced 90-day readmissions after pancreatic resection, but not other postoperative or oncologic outcomes. These findings suggest that affected patients should be expected to have outcomes similar to patients without mood disorders.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for borderline resectable and upfront resectable pancreatic cancer increasing overall survival and disease-free survival?

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the most common pancreatic neoplasm. Surgery is the factual curative option, but most patients present with advanced disease. In order to increase resectability, results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on metastatic disease were extrapolated to the neoadjuvant setting by many centers. The aim of our study was to retrospectively evaluate the outcome of patients who underwent upfront surgery (US)-PDAC and borderline (BR)-PDAC, and those resected after NAC to determine prognostic factors that might affect the outcome in these resected patients.

METHODS

One hundred fifty-one patients between January 2012 and March 2021 in our department were reviewed. Epidemiological characteristics and pre-operative induction treatment were assessed. Pathological reports were analyzed to evaluate the quality of oncological resection (R0/R1). Post-operative mortality and morbidity and survival data were reviewed.

RESULTS

One hundred thirteen patients were addressed for US, and 38 were considered BR and referred for surgery after induction chemotherapy. The pancreatic resection R0 was 71.5% and R1 28.5%. pT3 rate was significantly higher in the US than BR (58,4% vs 34,2%, p= 0.005). The mean OS and DFS rates were 29.4 months 15.9 months respectively. There was no difference between OS and DFS of US vs BR patients. N0 patients had significantly longer OS and DFS (p=<0.001). R0 patients had significantly longer OS (p=0.03) and longer DFS (P=0.08). In the multivariate analysis, the presence of postoperative pancreatic fistula, R1 resection, N+ and not access to adjuvant chemotherapy were bad prognostic factors of OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests the benefits of NAC for BR patients in downstaging tumors and rendering them amenable to resection, with same oncological result compared to US.

Surgical Approach does not Affect Return to Intended Oncologic Therapy Following Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Propensity-Matched Study

BACKGROUND

The effect of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD), including laparoscopic and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD and RPD, respectively), on compliance and time to return to intended oncologic therapy (RIOT) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains unknown.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with nonmetastatic PDAC were analyzed in the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Three groups were matched per propensity score: open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) and MIPD, LPD and RPD, and converted and nonconverted patients. RIOT rates and time to RIOT were examined.

RESULTS

A total of 14,135 patients were included: 11,834 (83.7%) underwent OPD and 2301 (16.3%) underwent MIPD. After score matching, RIOT rates (67.2 vs. 65.3%; p = 0.112) and RIOT within 8 weeks (57.7 vs. 56.4%; p = 0.276) were similar among MIPD and OPD groups, and approach was not a significant predictor of RIOT on multivariable regression. Neither RIOT nor time to RIOT were different among LPD and RPD groups (63.9 vs. 67.0%, and 58.4 vs. 56.9%, respectively). Compared with LPD, RPD was associated with lower conversion rates (HR 0.519; p < 0.001), and conversion was associated with longer median time to RIOT (10 vs. 8 weeks; p = 0.041).

CONCLUSION

In this national cohort, approach did not impact RIOT rates or time to RIOT for patients with PDAC. While conversion was associated with longer median time to RIOT, readiness to commence adjuvant therapy was similar for LPD and RPD.

Current status and future perspectives of clinical research in pancreatic cancer: Establishment of evidence by science

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most aggressive diseases in the world due to a lack of early detection, leading to an overall 5-year survival of only 10%. In recent years, clinical trials targeted pancreatic cancer in efforts to improve survival. These studies introduce new technologies, concepts, and evidence which have instilled new optimism for improving prognosis. This review summarizes the current status of the recent (5-year) clinical trials and describes contemporary research on pancreatic cancer, including surgical technology, diagnostic skills, traditional chemoradiotherapy, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted therapy, and precision medicine. Then, the future trend and direction of clinical trials on pancreatic cancer are discussed.

Korean Surgical Practice Guideline for Pancreatic Cancer 2021: A summary of evidence-based surgical approaches

Pancreatic cancer is the eighth most common cancer and the fifth most common cause of cancer-related deaths in Korea. Despite the increasing incidence and high mortality rate of pancreatic cancer, there are no appropriate surgical practice guidelines for the current domestic medical situation. To enable standardization of management and facilitate improvements in surgical outcome, a total of 10 pancreatic surgical experts who are members of Korean Association of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery have developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date, evidence-based research findings and expert opinions. This is an English version of the Korean Surgical Practice Guideline for Pancreatic Cancer 2021. This guideline includes 13 surgical questions and 15 statements. Due to the lack of high-level evidence, strong recommendation is almost impossible. However, we believe that this guideline will help surgeons understand the current status of evidence and suggest what to investigate further to establish more solid recommendations in the future.

Robotic versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy for Pancreatic and Periampullary Tumors (PORTAL): a study protocol for a multicenter phase III non-inferiority randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Pancreatoduodenectomy is a complex and challenging procedure that requires meticulous tissue dissection and proficient suturing skills. Minimally invasive surgery with the utilization of robotic platforms has demonstrated advantages in perioperative patient outcomes in retrospective studies. The development of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) in specific has progressed significantly, since first reported in 2003, and high-volume centers in pancreatic surgery are reporting large patient series with improved pain management and reduced length of stay. However, prospective studies to assess objectively the feasibility and safety of RPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) are currently lacking.

METHODS/DESIGN

The PORTAL trial is a multicenter randomized controlled, patient-blinded, parallel-group, phase III non-inferiority trial performed in seven high-volume centers for pancreatic and robotic surgery in China (> 20 RPD and > 100 OPD annually in each participating center). The trial is designed to enroll and randomly assign 244 patients with an indication for elective pancreatoduodenectomy for malignant periampullary and pancreatic lesions, as well as premalignant and symptomatic benign periampullary and pancreatic disease. The primary outcome is time to functional recovery postoperatively, measured in days. Secondary outcomes include postoperative morbidity and mortality, as well as perioperative costs. A sub-cohort of 128 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) will also be compared to assess the percentage of patients who undergo postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy within 8 weeks, in each arm. Secondary outcomes in this cohort will include patterns of disease recurrence, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival.

DISCUSSION

The PORTAL trial is designed to assess the feasibility and safety of RPD compared to OPD, in terms of functional recovery as described previously. Additionally, this trial will explore whether RPD allows increased access to postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy, in a sub-cohort of patients with PDAC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04400357 . Registered on May 22, 2020.

Psychological Functioning and Health Behaviors Associated with Weight Loss Patterns up to 13.7 Years After Weight Loss Surgery

Weight loss surgery produces dramatic health improvements immediately after surgery, including rapid declines in diabetes. However, less is known about its long-term effects. 124 St. Vincent Bariatric Center patients completed questionnaires on weight and psychological functioning a mean of 7.7 and 13.7 years post-surgery (T1 and T2, respectively). Because mean weight data may mask differing weight trajectories, participants were categorized based on weight over time. Most participants underwent Roux-En-Y gastric bypass (90.3%) and were Caucasian (96%), female (81.5%), and married (69.1%). Mean age at T2 was 64; mean %EWL was 64.9%. Most patients fit into one of three weight change patterns, reaching weight nadir, and regaining by T1 and then, by T2, experiencing (1) Weight Loss (n = 36), (2) Weight Maintenance (n = 37), or (3) Continued Weight Gain (n = 39). Groups differed significantly on body satisfaction, weighing frequency, and conscientiousness, with Weight Gainers significantly lower than other groups on conscientiousness and body satisfaction, and Weight Losers reporting higher frequency of weighing than Maintainers. Bariatric patients can maintain substantial weight loss and positive psychological functioning for many years post-surgery, although weight regain is associated with less body satisfaction. Conscientiousness may signify medical adherence, whereas frequent weighing may be a behavior that promotes ongoing weight loss.

Smoking in bariatric surgery: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of smoking among patients undergoing bariatric surgery has been reported to be as high as 40%. The effect of smoking in the perioperative period has been extensively studied for various surgical procedures, but limited data are available for bariatric surgery. The objective of this study is to review the existing literature to assess: (1) the impact of smoking on postoperative morbidity and mortality after bariatric surgery, (2) the relationship between smoking and weight loss after bariatric surgery, and (3) the efficacy of smoking cessation in the perioperative period among bariatric surgery patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library from 1946 to February 2020 was performed to identify relevant articles. Following an initial screen of 940 titles and abstracts, 540 full articles were reviewed.

RESULTS

Forty-eight studies met criteria for analysis: five structured interviews, three longitudinal studies, thirty-two retrospective studies and eight prospective studies. Smoking within 1 year prior to bariatric surgery was found to be an independent risk factor for increased 30-day mortality and major postoperative complications, particularly wound and pulmonary complications. Smoking was significantly associated with long-term complications including marginal ulceration and bone fracture. Smoking has little to no effect on weight loss following bariatric surgery, with studies reporting at most a 3% increased percentage excess weight loss. Rates of smoking recidivism are high with studies reporting that up to 17% of patients continue to smoke postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although current best practice guidelines recommend only a minimum of 6 weeks of abstinence from smoking prior to bariatric surgery, the findings of this review suggest that smoking within 1 year prior to bariatric surgery is associated with significant postoperative morbidity. More investigation is needed on strategies to improve smoking cessation compliance among bariatric surgery patients in the perioperative period.

Robotic gastrointestinal surgery: learning curve, educational programs and outcomes

The use of the robotic platform for gastrointestinal surgery was introduced nearly 20 years ago. However, significant growth and advancement has occurred primarily in the last decade. This is due to several advantages over traditional laparoscopic surgery allowing for more complex dissections and reconstructions. Several randomized controlled trials and retrospective reviews have demonstrated equivalent oncologic outcomes compared to open surgery with improved short-term outcomes. Unfortunately, there are currently no universally accepted or implemented training programs for robotic surgery and robotic surgery experience varies greatly. Additionally, several limitations to the robotic platform exist resulting in a distinct learning curve associated with various procedures. Therefore, implementation of robotic surgery requires a multidisciplinary team approach with commitment and investment from clinical faculty, operating room staff and hospital administrators. Additionally, there is a need for wider distribution of educational modules to train more surgeons and reduce the associated learning curve. This article will focus on the implementation of the robotic platform for surgery of the pancreas, stomach, liver, colon and rectum with an emphasis on the associated learning curve, educational platforms to develop proficiency and perioperative outcomes.

State of the art of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy

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.

Will It Play in Peoria? A Pilot Study of a Robotic Skills Curriculum for Surgical Oncology Fellows

INTRODUCTION

To implement a mastery-based robotic surgery curriculum using virtual reality (VR) and inanimate reality (IR) drills at multiple Complex General Surgical Oncology (CGSO) fellowships.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective study of curriculum feasibility and efficacy was conducted at four CGSO fellowship sites. All sites had simulators, and kits were provided to perform 19 biotissue drills. Fellows from three non-UPMC sites (n = 15) in 2016-2018 were compared with fellows from University of Pittsburgh (UPMC; n = 15) where the curriculum was validated in 2014-2018.

RESULTS

All fellows completed the pre- and post-test. There was no difference in pre-test scores between UPMC and non-UPMC sites. Only 7 of 15 non-UPMC fellows completed the VR curriculum (47% compliance) compared with all 15 UPMC fellows completing the VR curriculum (100% compliance). UPMC had higher curriculum times (217 versus 93 mins) and % mastery (86% versus 55%). Time spent on curriculum was associated with % mastery (p = 0.01). Both groups showed improvement between pre- and post-test. Post-test VR scores trended higher for UPMC (221 versus 180). Between the non-UPMC sites, there was a difference in compliance (p = 0.03) and % mastery (p = 0.03). Zero non-UPMC fellows performed the biotissue drills, while five contemporary UPMC fellows completed 253 biotissue drills. Approximately 140 UPMC faculty and 300 staff hours were spent on the pilot.

CONCLUSIONS

A proficiency curriculum can result in improved robotic console skills. However, multiple barriers to implementation potentially exist, including availability of simulators, availability of a training robot, on-site support staff, and universal buy-in from fellows, faculty, and leadership.

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy provides better histopathological outcomes as compared to its open counterpart: a meta-analysis

The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate whether robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) may provide better clinical and pathologic outcomes compared to its open counterpart. The Pubmed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched. Overall postoperative morbidity and resection margin involvement rate were the primary endpoints. Secondary endpoints included operating time, estimated blood loss (EBL), incisional surgical site infection (SSI) rate, length of hospital stay (LOS), and number of lymph nodes harvested. Twenty-four studies totaling 12,579 patients (2,175 robotic PD and 10,404 open PD were included. Overall postoperative mortality did not significantly differ [OR (95%CI) = 0.86 (0.74, 1.01); p = 0.06]. Resection margin involvement rate was significantly lower in robotic PD [15.6% vs. 19.9%; OR (95%CI) = 0.64 (0.41, 1.00); p = 0.05; NNT = 23]. Operating time was significantly longer in robotic PD [MD (95%CI) = 75.17 (48.05, 102.28); p < 0.00001]. EBL was significantly decreased in robotic PD [MD (95%CI) = - 191.35 (- 238.12, - 144.59); p < 0.00001]. Number of lymph nodes harvested was significantly higher in robotic PD [MD (95%CI) = 2.88 (1.12, 4.65); p = 0.001]. This meta-analysis found that robotic PD provides better histopathological outcomes as compared to open PD at the cost of longer operating time. Furthermore, robotic PD did not have any detrimental impact on clinical outcomes, with lower wound infection rates.

Current state of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery

The growth in minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS) has been accompanied by a recent surge in evidence-based data available to analyze patient outcomes. A small complement of randomized control trials as well as a multitude of observational studies have demonstrated both consistent similarities and differences between MIPS and the open approach, although abundant questions remain. This review highlights the available literature and emphasizes key factors for evaluating laparoscopic and robotic pancreatic surgery.

Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery—will robotic surgery be the future?

Due to the complexity of the procedures and the texture of the organ itself, pancreatic surgery remains a challenge in the field of visceral surgery. During the past decade, a minimally invasive approach to pancreatic surgery has gained distribution in clinical routine, extending from left-sided procedures to pancreatic head resections. While a laparoscopic approach has proven beneficial for many patients with left-sided pancreatic pathologies, the complex reconstruction in pancreas head resections remains worrisome with the laparoscopic approach. The robotic technique was established to overcome such technical constraints while preserving the advantages of the laparoscopic approach. Even though robotic systems are still in development, especially in pancreatoduodenectomy, the current literature demonstrates the feasibility of this approach and stable clinical and oncological outcomes compared to the open technique, albeit only under the condition of such operations being performed by specialist teams in a high-volume setting (>20 robotic pancreaticoduodenectomies per year). The aim of this review is to analyze the current evidence regarding a minimally invasive approach to pancreatic surgery and to review the potential of a robotic approach. Presently, there is still a scarcity of sound evidence and long-term oncological data regarding the role of minimally invasive and robotic pancreatic surgery in the literature, especially in the setting of pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Essential updates 2018/2019: Current topics in the surgical treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is highly malignant. While cancers in other organs have shown clear improvements in 5-year survival, the 5-year survival rate of pancreatic cancer is approximately 10%. Early relapse and metastasis are not uncommon, making it difficult to achieve an acceptable prognosis even after complete surgical resection of the pancreas. Studies have been performed on various treatments to improve the prognosis of PDAC, and multidisciplinary approaches including non-surgical treatments have led to gradual improvement. In the present literature review, we have described the significance of anatomical and biological resectability criteria, the concept of R0 resection in surgical treatment, the feasibility of minimally invasive surgery, the remarkable development of perioperative chemotherapy, the effectiveness of conversion surgery for unresectable PDAC, and ongoing challenges in PDAC treatment. We also provide an essential update on these subjects by focusing on recent trends and topics.

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: Surgical outcomes and survival analysis

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors are rare, with rising incidence and limited clinicopathological studies.

METHODS

Adult patients with pNET at a single tertiary care center were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, 87 patients with histologically confirmed pNET who underwent resection were evaluated. 11% of patients had functioning pNETs: 9 insulinoma and 1 VIPoma. The majority (88.5%) were nonfunctioning. The most common surgical procedure performed was distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (36.8%). 35.6% of cases were performed with minimally invasive surgery (MIS). MIS patients had fewer postoperative complications, shorter length of stay, and fewer ICU admissions.Disease-free survival (DFS) was unaffected by tumor size (p = 0.5) or lymph node status (p = 0.62). Patients with high-grade (G3) tumors experienced significantly shorter DFS (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

This series demonstrates that survival in patients with pNET is driven mostly by tumor grade, though overall most have long-term survival after surgical resection. Additionally, an MIS approach is efficacious in appropriately selected cases.

Robotic-assisted versus open total pancreatectomy: a propensity score-matched study

Background

Total pancreatectomy (TP) is a complex surgical procedure with significant postoperative morbidity. Despite the narrowed range of indications for TP, the introduction of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the increasing complexity of surgical resections performed in high-volume centers has increased the number of annually performed TPs, especially regarding malignant disease. The introduction of robotic-assisted pancreatic surgery has provided a novel and minimally invasive approach for TP, yet the feasibility of this technique is still unknown. This study assessed the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted total pancreatectomy (RTP) compared to conventional open total pancreatectomy (OTP).

Methods

All patients who underwent TP between March 2015 and July 2019 in a high-volume institution for pancreatic surgery were included in this retrospective study. Clinical data and perioperative outcomes were derived from the prospectively maintained institutional database. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) method was utilized to compare the RTP and OTP cohorts to minimize bias.

Results

A standardized surgical protocol was utilized for RTP following a learning curve of RPD and RDP. The median operative time for patients who underwent RTP was significantly decreased compared to those who underwent OTP [300 (IQR, 250-360) vs. 360 min (IQR, 300-525), P=0.031]. Additionally, en bloc resection and spleen-preserving rates were also higher in the RTP cohort. Major 30-day morbidity (Clavien-Dindo > IIIa) and 90-day mortality were similar between the two cohorts. After a median follow-up time of 15 (IQR, 8-24) months, both the RTP and OTP cohorts had a comparable quality of life regarding exocrine and endocrine insufficiency.

Conclusions

RTP appears to be safe and feasible when utilized in high-volume centers for the indicated management of benign and highly selected malignant pancreatic disease. However, further prospective randomized studies are needed to assess the feasibility of this approach.

Prehabilitation for Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgical Patients: Interim Analysis Demonstrates a Protective Effect From Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Improvement in the Frailty Phenotype

BACKGROUND

Prehabilitation encompasses multidisciplinary interventions to improve health and lessen incidence of surgical deterioration by reducing physiologic stress and functional decline. This study presents an interim analysis to demonstrate prehabilitation for hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgical patients.

METHODS

In 2018, a structured prehabilitation pilot program was implemented. Eligibility required HPB malignancy, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and residence within hour drive. Patients were enrolled into the 4-month program. The fitness component was composed of timed up and go test and grip strength with exercise recommendations. Nutrition involved evaluation of sarcopenic obesity, glucose management, and smoking and alcohol counseling. Psychological services included psychosocial assessments and advanced care planning, with social work referrals. Component were evaluated monthly by a physician using laboratory results, nutritional data and questionnaires, psychological assessments, and validated fitness tests. Nurse navigators spoke with patients weekly to monitor compliance.

RESULTS

At 12 months, nineteen patients were enrolled. Ten completed prehabilitation, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and underwent their surgical procedure. There were no differences found after prehabilitation in functional status, physical performance, psychosocial assessments, or nutrition. Frailty, as assessed by Fried frailty criteria, improved significantly after prehabilitation (P < .0001). Symptom severity and laboratory values did not change. Length of stay was 6.5 days and all patients were discharged to home. There was 1 readmission for transient ischemic attack and 90-day mortality rate was 0%.

DISCUSSION

Prehabilitation to improve recovery is a promising concept encompassing a wide array of multidisciplinary assessments and interventions. It may demonstrate a protective effect on physiologic decline from chemotherapy and may reverse frailty phenotypes.

Does center or surgeon volume influence adoption of minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy? A systematic review and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

There has been increasing uptake of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy during the past decade, but it remains a highly specialized procedure as benefits over open pancreatoduodenectomy remain contentious. This study aimed to evaluate current evidence on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy versus open pancreatoduodenectomy in terms of impact of center volume on outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review of articles on comparative cohort and registry studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy versus open pancreatoduodenectomy published until 31st December 2019 were identified, and meta-analyses were performed. Primary endpoints were International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

After screening 7,390 studies, 43 comparative cohort studies (8,755 patients) with moderate methodological quality and 3 original registry studies (43,735 patients) were included. For the cohort studies, the median annual hospital minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy volume was 10. No significant differences were found in grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio: 0.98, 95% confidence interval: 0.78-1.23) or 30-day mortality (odds ratio: 1.14, 95% confidence interval: 0.65-2.01) between minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy when compared with open. No publication biases were present and meta-regression identified no confounding for grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula, center volume or 30-day mortality. Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy was only strongly associated with significantly lower rates of postoperative pulmonary complications and surgical site infection, shorter length of stay, and significantly higher rates of R0 margin resections.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy remains noninferior to open pancreatoduodenectomy for grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula but is strongly associated with significantly lower rates of postoperative pulmonary complications and surgical site infection. Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy can be adopted safely with good outcomes irrespective of annual center resection volume.

Safety and efficacy of robot-assisted versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a meta-analysis of multiple worldwide centers

The objective of the study is to compare the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) with open PD. The PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched for the literature available from their respective inception dates up to May 2020 to find studies comparing robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) with open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). The RevMan 5.3 statistical software was used for analysis to evaluate surgical outcome and oncology safety. The combination ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using fixed-effect or random effect models. 18 cohort studies from 16 medical centers were eligible with a total of 5795 patients including 1420 RPD group patients and 4375 OPD group patients. The RPD group fared better than the OPD group in terms of estimated blood loss (EBL) (WMD = - 175.65, 95% CI (- 251.85, - 99.44), P < 0.00001), wound infection rate (RR = 0.60, 95% CI (0.44, 0.81), P = 0.001), reoperation rate (RR = 0.61, 95% CI (0.41, 0.91), P = 0.02), hospital day (WMD = - 2.95, 95% CI (- 5.33, - 0.56), P = 0.02), intraoperative blood transfusion (RR = 0.56, 95% CI (0.42, 0.76), P = 0.0001), overall complications (RR = 0.78, 95% CI (0.64, 0.95), P = 0.01), and clinical postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (RR = 0.54, 95% CI (0.41, 0.70), P < 0.0001). In terms of lymph node clearance (WMD = 0.48, 95% CI (- 2.05, 3.02), P = 0.71), R0 rate (RR = 1.05, 95% CI (1.00, 1.11), P = 0.05), postoperative pancreatic fistula (RR = 1, 95% CI (0.85, 1.19), P = 0.97), bile leakage (RR = 0.99, 95% CI (0.54, 1.83), P = 0.98), delayed gastric emptying (DGE) (RR = 0.79, 95% CI (0.60, 1.03), P = 0.08), 90-day mortality (RR = 0.82, 95% CI (0.62, 1.10), P = 0.19), and severe complications (RR = 0.98, 95% CI (0.71, 1.36), P = 0.91), and there were no significant differences between the two groups. Robotic surgery was inferior to open surgery in terms of operational time (WMD = 80.85, 95% CI (16.09, 145.61), P = 0.01). RPD is not inferior to OPD, and it is even more advantageous for EBL, wound infection rate, reoperation rate, hospital stay, intraoperative transfusion, overall complications and clinical POPF. However, these findings need to be further verified by high-quality randomized controlled trials.

Formal robotic training diminishes the learning curve for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy: Implications for new programs in complex robotic surgery

INTRODUCTION

The learning curve associated with robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) is a hurdle for new programs to achieve optimal results. Since early analysis, robotic training has recently expanded, and the RPD approach has been refined. The purpose of this study is to examine RPD outcomes for surgeons who implemented a new program after receiving formal RPD training to determine if such training reduces the learning curve.

METHODS

Outcomes for consecutive patients undergoing RPD at a single tertiary institution were compared to optimal RPD benchmarks from a previously reported learning curve analysis. Two surgical oncologists with formal RPD training performed all operations with one surgeon as bedside assistant and the other at the console.

RESULTS

Forty consecutive RPD operations were evaluated. Mean operative time was 354 ± 54 min, and blood loss was 300 ml. Length of stay was 7 days. Three patients (7.5%) underwent conversion to open. Pancreatic fistula affected five patients (12.5%). Operative time was stable over the study and lower than the reported benchmark. These RPD operative outcomes were similar to reported surgeon outcomes after the learning curve.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests formal robotic training facilitates safe and efficient adoption of RPD for new programs, reducing or eliminating the learning curve.

BODY-Q patient-reported outcomes measure (PROM) to assess sleeve gastrectomy vs. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: eating behavior, eating-related distress, and eating-related symptoms

BACKGROUND

Post-operative changes in eating behavior, eating-related distress and eating-related symptoms play an important role in the lives of bariatric surgery patients. However, there are no studies that assess these outcomes using a specifically designed patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for patients undergoing bariatric surgery. We use our newly developed and validated scales as part of the well-established BODY-Q PROMs to compare laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass patients (LRYGB).

METHODS

We analyzed data from an international multi-center prospective cohort study of patients over 18 who underwent bariatric surgery. We used multivariable linear regression models to assess the difference between LRYGB and LSG for the new BODY-Q scales, which include eating behavior, eating-related distress and eating-related symptoms. All analyses were corrected for significant confounding variables.

RESULTS

Out of 1420 patients, 920 underwent LRYGB and 500 underwent LSG. The LRYGB group had a higher percentage total weight loss (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in eating behavior (e.g., stop eating before feeling full, avoiding unhealthy snacks, etc.) or eating-related distress (e.g., feeling ashamed or out of control after eating). Patients who underwent LSG scored significantly better on the post-prandial eating-related symptoms scale (e.g., vomiting, reflux; p < 0.001). Symptoms more prevalent in the LRYGB patients were related to dumping syndrome whereas symptoms more prevalent in LSG patients were related to reflux.

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent LRYGB had a significantly better weight loss after surgery, but they scored worse on post-prandial symptoms in comparison to LSG patients. This information may be relevant for patients in the pre-operative counseling setting, as it may influence their decision for surgical procedure selection.

Application of artificial intelligence for the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is a complex cancer of the digestive tract. Diagnosis and treatment can be very difficult because of unclear early symptoms, the deep anatomical location of cancer tissues, and the high degree of cancer cell invasion. The prognosis is extremely poor; the 5-year survival rate of patients with pancreatic cancer is less than 1%. Artificial intelligence (AI) has great potential for application in the medical field. In addition to AI-based applications, such as disease data processing, imaging, and pathological image recognition, robotic surgery has revolutionized surgical procedures. To better understand the current role of AI in pancreatic cancer and predict future development trends, this article comprehensively reports the application of AI to the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of pancreatic cancer.

Robotic pancreatic resection. Personal experience with 105 cases

OBJECTIVE

the first robotic pancreatic resection in Brazil was performed by our team in 2008. Since March 2018, a new policy prompted us to systematically employ the robot in all minimally invasive pancreatic surgery. The aim of this paper is to review our experience with robotic pancreatic resection.

METHODS

all patients who underwent robotic pancreatic resection from March 2018 through December 2019 were identified. Descriptive data were collected. Preoperative variables included age, sex, and indication for surgery. Intraoperative variables included operative time, bleeding, blood transfusion.

RESULTS

105 patients underwent robotic pancreatectomy. Median age was 60.5 years old. Fifty-five patients were female. 51 patients underwent robotic pancreatoduodenectomies, 34 distal pancreatectomy. Morbidity was 23.8%, mainly related to postoperative pancreatic fistula and one death occurred (mortality of 0.9%). Three patients (2.8%) were converted to open surgery. Four patients had delayed gastric emptying and two presented bleeding. Twenty-four patients had pancreatic fistula that was treated conservatively with late removal of the pancreatic drain. No patient required percutaneous drainage, reintervention or hospital readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

the robotic platform is useful for the reconstruction of the alimentary tract after pancreatoduodenectomy or after central pancreatectomy. It may increase the preservation of the spleen during distal pancreatectomies. Pancreas sparing techniques, such as enucleation, resection of uncinate process and central pancreatectomy, should be used to avoid exocrine and/or endocrine insufficiency. Robotic resection of the pancreas is safe and feasible for selected patients. It should be performed in specialized centers by surgeons with experience in both open and minimally invasive pancreatic surgery.

Safety and oncologic efficacy of robotic compared to open pancreaticoduodenectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Emerging data from multi-institutional and national databases suggest that robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy is safe and feasible for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Nevertheless, there are limited reports evaluating its safety and oncologic efficacy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

METHOD

This is a retrospective study from the 2010-2016 National Cancer Database comparing the postoperative, pathological and long-term oncologic outcomes between robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma following neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

We identified 155 (5%) RPD and 3329 (95%) OPD following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The use of the robot increased from 3 cases in 2010 to 50 cases in 2016. RPD patients were more likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy and to be treated at academic centers. After adjustment, RPD was associated with a higher proportion of adequate lymphadenectomy, receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy, decreased rate of prolonged length of stay, and similar 90-day mortality. There was no difference in median overall survival between RPD and OPD (25.6 months vs. 27.5 months, Log Rank p = 0.879). The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates for RPD were 83%, 36% and 22% and for OPD were 86%, 38% and 22%. After adjustment, the use of robotic surgery was associated with similar overall survival compared to the open approach (HR 1.011, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.776-1.316).

CONCLUSIONS

Following neoadjuvant chemotherapy, RPD is associated with similar short- and long-term mortality with the advantage of shorter length of stay, higher proportion of adequate lymphadenectomy and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy.

Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic and open pancreatectomy in a national cohort of pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Robotic pancreatectomy is gaining momentum; however, limited data exist on the long-term survival of this approach for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The objective of this study is to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) to open surgery in patients with PDAC.

STUDY DESIGN

Robotic and open pancreatectomy for stages I-III PDAC were obtained from the 2010 to 2016 National Cancer Database.

RESULTS

We identified 17 831 pancreaticoduodenectomies and 2718 distal pancreatectomies of which 626 (4%) and 332 (12%) were robotic, respectively. There was no difference in median overall survival between RPD (22.0 months) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (21.8 months; logrank P = .755). The adjusted hazard ratio [HR] was 1.014 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.903-1.139). The median overall survival for RDP (35.3 months) was higher than open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) (24.9 months; logrank P = .001). The adjusted HR suggests a benefit to RDP compared to ODP (HR, 0.744; 95% CI: 0.632-0.868) CONCLUSION: In a national cohort of resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma, the robotic platform was associated with similar long-term survival for pancreaticoduodenectomy, but improved survival for distal pancreatectomy.