What are the true benefits of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy for patients with pancreatic cancer?

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a devastating disease, and multimodal treatment including high-quality surgery can improve survival outcomes. Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has evolved with minimally invasive approaches including the implementation of robotic PD (RPD). In this special report, we review the literature whilst evaluating the 'true benefits' of RPD compared to open approach for the treatment of PDAC.

AREAS COVERED

We have performed a mini-review of studies assessing PD approaches and compared intraoperative characteristics, perioperative outcomes, post-operative complications and oncological outcomes.

EXPERT OPINION

RPD was associated with similar or longer operative times, and reduced intra-operative blood loss. Perioperative pain scores were significantly lower with shorter lengths of stay with the robotic approach. With regards to post-operative complications, post-operative pancreatic fistula rates were similar, with lower rates of clinically relevant fistulas after RPD. Oncological outcomes were comparable or superior in terms of margin status, lymph node harvest, time to chemotherapy and survival between RPD and OPD. In conclusion, RPD allows safe implementation of minimally invasive PD. The current literature shows that RPD is either equivalent, or superior in certain aspects to OPD. Once more centers gain sufficient experience, RPD is likely to demonstrate clear superiority over alternative approaches.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and stereotactic body radiation therapy for borderline resectable pancreas adenocarcinoma: influence of vascular margin status and type of chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

The influence of chemotherapy type and vascular margin status after sequential chemotherapy and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) is unknown.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on BRPC patients treated with chemotherapy and 5-fraction SBRT from 2009 to 2021. Surgical outcomes and SBRT-related toxicity were reported. Clinical outcomes were estimated by Kaplan-Meier with log rank comparisons.

RESULTS

A total of 303 patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and SBRT to a median dose of 40 Gy prescribed to the tumor-vessel interface and median dose of 32.4 Gyto 95% of the gross tumor volume. One hundred and sixty-nine patients (56%) were resected and benefited from improved median OS (41.1 vs 15.5 months, P < 0.001). Close/positive vascular margins were not associated with worse OS or FFLRF. Type of neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not influence OS for resected patients, but FOLFIRINOX was associated with improved median OS in unresected patients (18.2 vs 13.1 months, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

For BRPC, the effect of a positive or close vascular margin may be mitigated by neoadjuvant therapy. Shorter duration neoadjuvant chemotherapy as well as the optimal biological effective dose of radiotherapy should be prospectively explored.

Towards an updated view on the clinical management of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Current and future perspectives

Pancreatic cancer has a dire prognosis and will represent the second leading cause of cancer death in the next 10 years. The multifactorial approach represents one of the main issues in controlling the extension of this neoplasm. In recent years, the characteristics of the tumor microenvironment, metastasis mechanisms and the relationship between immune system and neoplastic cells have been described, which has made it possible to understand the pathophysiology of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Currently, there is a failure to provide an effective preventive method or early detection, so patients present with an advanced stage at the time of diagnosis. Despite numerous efforts, little progress has been made in clinical outcome and in improving survival in long term. Therefore, in the recent years, diverse diagnostic tests, treatments and possible approaches have been developed in the fields of radiotherapy, chemotherapy and surgery to find a combination of them that improves life expectancy in patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. At the moment, numerous clinical trials are being conducted to evaluate preventive diagnostic procedures such as serological markers or perfecting available imaging tests. On the other hand, implementation of immunotherapy is being studied in a neoplasm that has lagged in the application of this procedure since present possible treatments do not substantially improve quality of life. Therefore, the purpose of our study is to summarize the main progresses that have been made in the diagnosis, treatment and screening of this disease, explaining the limitations that have been observed and analyzing future prospects in the management of this illness.

Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: a Propensity-Matched Analysis to Open and Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy

INTRODUCTION

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy is slowly gaining acceptance within pancreatic surgery. Advantages have been demonstrated for robotic surgery in other fields, but robust data for pancreaticoduodenectomy is limited. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) and laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD).

METHODS

Patients who underwent a pancreaticoduodenectomy between January 2011 and July 2019 at the Johns Hopkins Hospital were included in this retrospective propensity-matched analysis. The RPD cohort was matched to patients who underwent OPD in a 1:2 fashion and LPD in a 1:1 fashion. Short-term outcomes were analyzed for all three cohorts.

RESULTS

In total, 1644 patients were included, of which 96 (5.8%) underwent RPD, 131 (8.0%) LPD, and 1417 (86.2%) OPD. RPD was associated with a decreased incidence of delayed gastric emptying (9.4%) compared to OPD (23.5%; P = 0.006). The median estimated blood loss was significantly less in the RPD cohort (RPD vs OPD, 150 vs 487 mL; P < 0.001, RPD vs LPD, 125 vs 300 mL; P < 0.001). Compared to OPD, the robotic approach was associated with a shorter median length of stay (median 8 vs 9 days; P = 0.014) and a decrease in wound complications (4.2% vs 16.7%; P = 0.002). The incidence of other postoperative complications was comparable between RPD and OPD, and RPD and LPD.

CONCLUSION

In the hands of experienced surgeons, RPD may have a modest yet statistically significant reduction in estimated blood loss, postoperative length of stay, wound complications, and delayed gastric emptying comparing to OPD in similar patients.

Tissue-Engineering the Fibrous Pancreatic Tumour Stroma Capsule in 3D Tumouroids to Demonstrate Paclitaxel Response

Pancreatic cancer is a unique cancer in that up to 90% of its tumour mass is composed of a hypovascular and fibrotic stroma. This makes it extremely difficult for chemotherapies to be delivered into the core of the cancer mass. We tissue-engineered a biomimetic 3D pancreatic cancer ("tumouroid") model comprised of a central artificial cancer mass (ACM), containing MIA Paca-2 cells, surrounded by a fibrotic stromal compartment. This stromal compartment had a higher concentration of collagen type I, fibronectin, laminin, and hyaluronic acid (HA) than the ACM. The incorporation of HA was validated with alcian blue staining. Response to paclitaxel was determined in 2D MIA Paca-2 cell cultures, the ACMs alone, and in simple and complex tumouroids, in order to demonstrate drug sensitivity within pancreatic tumouroids of increasing complexity. The results showed that MIA Paca-2 cells grew into the complex stroma and invaded as cell clusters with a maximum distance of 363.7 µm by day 21. In terms of drug response, the IC50 for paclitaxel for MIA Paca-2 cells increased from 0.819 nM in 2D to 3.02 nM in ACMs and to 5.87 nM and 3.803 nM in simple and complex tumouroids respectively, indicating that drug penetration may be significantly reduced in the latter. The results demonstrate the need for biomimetic models during initial drug testing and evaluation.

Retrocolic versus antecolic gastrointestinal reconstruction in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

With the advancement of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD), several reconstruction methods have been advocated to make RPD more effective and safer. In this study, we investigated the safety and effectiveness of RPD using a left retrocolic (L-port) technique and compared it with those of RPD using an antecolic technique.

METHODS

Between October 2015 and August 2016, we retrospectively reviewed consecutive cases of RPD before and after introducing the L-port technique for gastrointestinal reconstruction. The L-port technique was mainly performed for retrocolic gastrojejunal reconstruction and some cases of duodenojejunal reconstruction. The perioperative and postoperative outcomes were compared in the two groups.

RESULTS

Eighty-three cases of RPD were retrieved for statistical analysis. Compared with the antecolic group, the L-port group was significantly associated with a shorter operative time (median time [IQR] 345 [307-384] min vs. 390 [370-455] min, P < 0.001), reconstruction time (54 [48-59] min vs. 84 [75-98] min, P < 0.001) and lower incidence of delayed gastric emptying. There were no cases of re-operation due to internal herniation, colonic ischemia, or bowel volvulus in the L-port group during the 1-year follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrated that the L-port technique of RPD is a safe and feasible technique for gastrointestinal reconstruction.

Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary disease: a comprehensive review of literature and meta-analysis of outcomes compared with open surgery

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) has been gradually attempted. However, whether MIPD is superior, equal or inferior to its conventional open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) is not clear.

METHODS

Studies published up to May 2017 were searched in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Main outcomes were comprehensively reviewed and measured including conversion to open approach, operation time (OP), estimated blood loss (EBL), transfusion, length of hospital stay (LOS), overall complications, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), readmission, reoperation and reasons of preoperative death, number of retrieved lymph nodes (RLN), surgical margins, recurrence, and survival. The software of Review Manage version 5.1 was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred studies were included for systematic review and 26 out of them (totally 3402 cases, 1064 for MIPD, 2338 for OPD) were included for meta-analysis. In the early years, most articles were case reports or non-control case series studies, while in the last 6 years high-volume and comparative researches were increasing gradually. Systematic review revealed conversion rates of MIPD to OPD ranged from 0% to 40%. The mean or median OP of MIPD ranged from 276 to 657 min. The total POPF rates vary between 3.8% and 50% observed in all systematic reviewed studies. Meta-analysis demonstrated MIPD had longer OP (WMD = 99.4 min; 95%CI: 46.0 ~ 152.8, P < 0.01), lower blood loss (WMD = -0.54 ml; 95% CI, -0.88 ~ -0.20 ml; P < 0.01), lower transfusion rate (RR = 0.73, 95%CI: 0.57 ~ 0.94, P = 0.02), shorter LOS (WMD = -3.49 days; 95%CI: -4.83 ~ -2.15, P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in time to oral intake, postoperative complications, POPF, reoperation, readmission, perioperative mortality and number of retrieved lymph nodes.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates MIPD is technically feasible and safety on the basis of historical studies. MIPD is associated with less blood loss, faster postoperative recovery, shorter length of hospitalization and longer operation time. These findings are waiting for being confirmed with robust prospective comparative studies and randomized clinical trials.

Total robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a complex operation with high perioperative morbidity and mortality, even in the highest volume centers. Since the development of the robotic platform, the number of reports on robotic-assisted pancreatic surgery has been on the rise. This article reviews the current state of completely robotic PD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed including studies published between January 2000 and July 2016 reporting PDs in which all procedural steps (dissection, resection and reconstruction) were performed robotically.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria, including a total of 738 patients. Data regarding perioperative outcomes such as operative time, blood loss, mortality, morbidity, conversion and oncologic outcomes were analyzed. No major differences were observed in mortality, morbidity and oncologic parameters, between robotic and non-robotic approaches. However, operative time was longer in robotic PD, whereas the estimated blood loss was lower. The conversion rate to laparotomy was 6.5-7.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic PD is feasible and safe in high-volume institutions, where surgeons are experienced and medical staff are appropriately trained. Randomized controlled trials are required to further investigate outcomes of robotic PD. Additionally, cost analysis and data on long-term oncologic outcomes are needed to evaluate cost-effectiveness of the robotic approach in comparison with the open technique.

Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Colectomy Results in Increased Operative Time Without Improved Perioperative Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Interest in robotic technology is burgeoning within the field of colorectal surgery. However, benefits of robotic-assisted colectomy (RAC) compared with laparoscopic colectomy (LC) remain ambiguous.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients who underwent minimally invasive colectomy during 2012-2013 were identified from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Short-term perioperative outcomes were compared between 1:1 propensity-matched groups. A subset analysis was performed among patients who underwent segmental resections.

RESULTS

Among the 15,976 patients included, 498 (3.1 %) colectomies were performed with robotic assistance. After matching for demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics, there were no differences between RAC and LC in complications such as wound infection, urinary tract infection, cardiopulmonary or thromboembolic events, renal insufficiency, anastomotic leaks, transfusions, readmissions, or 30-day mortality (all p > 0.05). However, operative time was markedly higher for RAC (196 vs. 166 min, p < 0.001). Among segmental resections, operative time remained significantly longer for RAC (190 vs. 153 min, p < 0.001) without differences in perioperative outcomes (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In this early experience, RAC resulted in similar perioperative outcomes when compared to LC but was associated with longer operative time. Given the focus on value-based healthcare, utilizing RAC in straightforward colectomies may not be financially justifiable at this stage of adoption.

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is considered one of the most complex and technically challenging abdominal surgeries performed by general surgeons. With increasing use of minimally invasive surgery, this operation continues to be performed most commonly in an open fashion. Open PD (OPD) is characterized by high morbidity and mortality rates in published series. Since the early 2000s, use of robotics for PD has slowly evolved. For appropriately selected patients, robotic PD (RPD) has been shown to have less intraoperative blood loss, decreased morbidity and mortality, shorter hospital length of stay, and similar oncological outcomes compared with OPD. At our high-volume center, we have found lower complication rates for RPD along with no difference in total cost when compared with OPD. With demonstrated non-inferior oncologic outcomes for RPD, the potential exists that RPD may be the future standard in surgical management for pancreatic disease. We present a case of a patient with a pancreatic head mass and describe our institution's surgical technique for RPD.