Robotic Resection of Gallbladder Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Comparative Study to Open Resection

Innovations in surgery for gallbladder cancer: A review of robotic surgery as a feasible and safe option

BACKGROUND

This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted surgical techniques in the treatment of gallbladder cancer, comparing it with traditional open and laparoscopic methods.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature searched for comparative analyses of patient outcomes following robotic, open, and laparoscopic surgeries, focusing on oncological results and perioperative benefits.

RESULTS

Five total studies published between 2019 and 2023 were identified. Findings indicate that robotic-assisted surgery for gallbladder cancer is as effective as traditional methods in terms of oncological outcomes, with potential advantages in precision and perioperative recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic surgery offers a viable and potentially advantageous alternative for gallbladder cancer treatment, warranting further research to confirm its benefits and establish comprehensive surgical guidelines.

Gallbladder cancer: surgical treatment, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy

Gallbladder cancer is a common type of biliary tract tumor. Optimal management for early stage cases typically involves radical excision as the primary treatment modality. Various surgical techniques, including laparoscopic, robotic, and navigational surgery, have demonstrated favorable clinical outcomes in radical gallbladder excision. Unfortunately, most patients are ineligible for surgical intervention because of the advanced stage of the disease upon diagnosis. Consequently, non-surgical interventions, such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy, have become the mainstay of treatment for patients in advanced stages. This review focuses on elucidating various surgical techniques as well as advancements in immunotherapy and targeted therapy in the context of recent advancements in gallbladder cancer research.

Comparing robotic and open surgical techniques in gallbladder cancer management: a detailed systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the safety and oncological outcomes of robotic surgery compared to open surgery in treating gallbladder cancer (GBC). In October 2023, we performed a literature search across major global databases such as PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. We employed a Review Manager for parameter comparisons. This study has been registered with PROSPERO under the identifier CRD42023476686. Our final meta-analysis incorporated 5 cohort studies, encompassing a total of 353 patients. Compared to the Open Group (OG), the Robotic Group (RG) had reduced intraoperative blood loss (WMD - 217.72 ml, 95% CI - 371.08 to - 64.35; p = 0.005), shorter hospital stay (WMD - 1.80 days, 95% CI - 2.66 to - 0.95; p < 0.0001), and fewer overall complications (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.10-0.97; p = 0.04). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of operation duration, postoperative inpatient days, readmission rate, major complications, 1-year postoperative survival, 2-year postoperative survival, and mortality rates. In our study, we found that for patients with gallbladder cancer, robotic radical cholecystectomy offers certain potential advantages over open radical cholecystectomy. This suggests that robotic radical cholecystectomy might be the optimal choice for treating gallbladder cancer. However, further validation from high-quality randomized clinical trials is required.

Robotic Hepatic Bisegmentectomy (s4b + s5) and Hilar Lymphadenectomy for Incidental Gallbladder Cancer Using Glissonian Approach

BACKGROUND

Gallbladder carcinoma is a rare cancer with a poor prognosis and the most common biliary tract malignancy. This video shows robotic treatment of a patient with incidental gallbladder cancer diagnosed after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The operation consisted of a robotic bisegmentectomy (liver segments 4b and 5) using a Glissonian approach and a hilar lymphadenectomy.

METHODS

A 73-year-old woman with no relevant history underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy at another hospital facility. The pathology revealed a gallbladder carcinoma. The patient was then referred for further treatment. Pathologic revision confirmed T2a carcinoma and staging was negative for distant metastases. The multidisciplinary team decided on a radical resection that will consist of a hilar lymphadenectomy and a frozen section of the cystic stump along the resection of segments 4b and 5. A robotic approach was proposed, and consent was obtained.

RESULTS

The operation time was 300 min and was performed 21 days after the cholecystectomy. Estimated blood loss was 120 mL with no transfusions required during or after the procedure. The postoperative recovery was uneventful, and the patient was discharged on the fourth postoperative day. The final pathology showed no residual disease in the liver specimen and no metastases among 16 removed lymph nodes.

CONCLUSIONS

The robotic approach is safe and feasible for radical treatment after incidentally discovered gallbladder cancer. The Glissonian approach is useful for anatomic resection of liver segments 4b and 5. This video can help oncologic surgeons to perform this challenging procedure.

Gallbladder Cancer: Current Multimodality Treatment Concepts and Future Directions

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is the most common primary tumor site of biliary tract cancer (BTC), accounting for 0.6% of newly diagnosed cancers and 0.9% of cancer-related deaths. Risk factors, including female sex, age, ethnic background, and chronic inflammation of the gallbladder, have been identified. Surgery is the only curative option for early-stage GBC, but only 10% of patients are primary eligible for curative treatment. After neoadjuvant treatment, up to one-third of locally advanced GBC patients could benefit from secondary surgical treatment. After surgery, only a high-risk subset of patients benefits from adjuvant treatment. For advanced-stage GBC, palliative chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin is the current standard of care in line with other BTCs. After the failure of gemcitabine and cisplatin, data for second-line treatment in non-resectable GBC is poor, and the only recommended chemotherapy regimen is FOLFOX (5-FU/folinic acid and oxaliplatin). Recent advances with the PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab open the therapy landscape for immune checkpoint inhibition in GBC. Meanwhile, targeted therapy approaches are a cornerstone of GBC therapy based on molecular profiling and new evidence of molecular differences between different BTC forms and might further improve the prognosis of GBC patients.

Robotic Surgery for Biliary Tract Cancer

Biliary tract cancer consists of cholangiocarcinoma (CC) and gallbladder cancer (GBC). When resectable, surgery provides the best chance at long-term survival. Unfortunately, surgery for these tumors is associated with long operative times, high morbidities, and prolonged hospital stays. Minimally invasive surgery has been shown to impact selected outcomes, including length of stay, in other diseases, and robotic surgery may offer additional advantages compared to laparoscopic surgery in treating bile duct cancers. This is a systematic review of robotic surgery for biliary tract cancer. Predetermined selection criteria were used to appraise the literature. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. In total, 20 unique articles with a total of 259 patients with biliary tract cancer undergoing robotic surgery met the inclusion criteria. For CC and GBC, respectively, the weighted average operative time was 401 and 277 min, the estimated blood loss was 348 and 260 mL, the conversion rate to open was 7 and 3.5%, the all-cause morbidity was 52 and 9.7%, the major morbidity was 12 and 4.4%, the perioperative mortality was 1.4 and 0%, the length of stay was 15 and 4.8 days, the positive margin rate was 27 and 9%, and the number of lymph nodes retrieved was 4.2 and 8. Robotic surgery for biliary tract cancer appears non-inferior to open surgery when compared to the published contemporary data. However, the current literature on the topic is of low quality, and future prospective/randomized studies are needed.