Robotic surgery of the pancreas

[Robotic pancreatic surgery]

Robotic operations as a further development of conventional laparoscopic surgery have been introduced for nearly all interventions in visceral surgery during the last decade. They also currently have a high importance and acceptance in pancreatic surgery despite a relevant learning curve and high associated costs. Standard procedures, such as robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and partial pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) are most frequently performed, whereas extended resections, e.g., vascular reconstructions of the portal vein, are still limited to a small number of centers worldwide. Potential advantages of robotic pancreatic surgery compared to open surgery include, in particular, less blood loss and a faster postoperative recovery of the patients leading to a shorter hospital stay. Compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery, robotic approaches offer advantages with respect to better visualization and three-dimensional dexterity of the instruments; however, the currently published literature comprises only retrospective or prospective observational studies and randomized controlled results are not yet available but first study results in this respect are expected within the next 2-3 years.

Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic and peri-ampullary neoplasm (DIPLOMA-2): study protocol for an international multicenter patient-blinded randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) aims to reduce the negative impact of surgery as compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) and is increasingly becoming part of clinical practice for selected patients worldwide. However, the safety of MIPD remains a topic of debate and the potential shorter time to functional recovery needs to be confirmed. To guide safe implementation of MIPD, large-scale international randomized trials comparing MIPD and OPD in experienced high-volume centers are needed. We hypothesize that MIPD is non-inferior in terms of overall complications, but superior regarding time to functional recovery, as compared to OPD.

METHODS/DESIGN

The DIPLOMA-2 trial is an international randomized controlled, patient-blinded, non-inferiority trial performed in 14 high-volume pancreatic centers in Europe with a minimum annual volume of 30 MIPD and 30 OPD. A total of 288 patients with an indication for elective pancreatoduodenectomy for pre-malignant and malignant disease, eligible for both open and minimally invasive approach, are randomly allocated for MIPD or OPD in a 2:1 ratio. Centers perform either laparoscopic or robot-assisted MIPD based on their surgical expertise. The primary outcome is the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®), measuring all complications graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification up to 90 days after surgery. The sample size is calculated with the following assumptions: 2.5% one-sided significance level (α), 80% power (1-β), expected difference of the mean CCI® score of 0 points between MIPD and OPD, and a non-inferiority margin of 7.5 points. The main secondary outcome is time to functional recovery, which will be analyzed for superiority. Other secondary outcomes include post-operative 90-day Fitbit™ measured activity, operative outcomes (e.g., blood loss, operative time, conversion to open surgery, surgeon-reported outcomes), oncological findings in case of malignancy (e.g., R0-resection rate, time to adjuvant treatment, survival), postoperative outcomes (e.g., clinically relevant complications), healthcare resource utilization (length of stay, readmissions, intensive care stay), quality of life, and costs. Postoperative follow-up is up to 36 months.

DISCUSSION

The DIPLOMA-2 trial aims to establish the safety of MIPD as the new standard of care for this selected patient population undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy in high-volume centers, ultimately aiming for superior patient recovery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN27483786. Registered on August 2, 2023.

Perioperative and Oncological Outcomes of Robotic Versus Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Low-Risk Surgical Candidates: A Multicenter Propensity Score-Matched Study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to perform a multicenter comparison between robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD).

BACKGROUND

Previous comparisons of RPD versus OPD have only been carried out in small, single-center studies of variable quality.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent RPD (n = 1032) or OPD (n = 1154) at 7 centers in China between July 2012 and July 2020 were included. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed.

RESULTS

After PSM, 982 patients in each group were enrolled. The RPD group had significantly lower estimated blood loss (EBL) (190.0 vs 260.0 mL; P < 0.001), and a shorter postoperative 1length of hospital stay (LOS) (12.0 (9.0-16.0) days vs 14.5 (11.0-19.0) days; P < 0.001) than the OPD group. There were no significant differences in operative time, major morbidity including clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF), bile leakage, delayed gastric emptying, postoperative pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), reoperation, readmission or 90-day mortality rates. Multivariable analysis showed R0 resection, CR-POPF, PPH and reoperation to be independent risk factors for 90-day mortality. Subgroup analysis on patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) (n = 326 in each subgroup) showed RPD had advantages over OPD in EBL and postoperative LOS. There were no significant differences in median disease-free survival (15.2 vs 14.3 months, P = 0.94) or median overall survival (24.2 vs 24.1 months, P = 0.88) between the 2 subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

RPD was comparable to OPD in feasibility and safety. For patients with PDAC, RPD resulted in similar oncologic and survival outcomes as OPD.

Surgical Management of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) are relatively uncommon malignancies, characterized as either functional or nonfunctional secondary to their secretion of biologically active hormones. A wide range of clinical behavior can be seen, with the primary prognostic indicator being tumor grade as defined by the Ki67 proliferation index and mitotic index. Surgery is the primary treatment modality for PNETs. While functional PNETs should undergo resection for symptom control as well as potential curative intent, nonfunctional PNETs are increasingly managed nonoperatively. There is increasing data to suggest small, nonfunctional PNETs (less than 2 cm) are appropriate follow with nonoperative active surveillance. Evidence supports surgical management of metastatic disease if possible, and occasionally even surgical management of the primary tumor in the setting of widespread metastases. In this review, we highlight the evolving surgical management of local and metastatic PNETs.

Robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly patients: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is complex procedure with high morbidity in the elderly. This retrospective study aimed to compare post-operative outcomes in patients ≥75 years of age who underwent robot-assisted (RA)PD and open PD.

METHODS

We analyzed 2502 patients ≥75 years of age who underwent PD from 2015 to 2018 in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. RAPD and open PD patients were propensity score matched 1:5 to assess the 30-day outcomes of interest: postoperative complications, length of stay, discharge destination, and readmissions.

RESULTS

Of 725 matched patients, 110 underwent RAPD, 615 OPD, and 12 were converted to an open operation. Post-operative outcomes were largely similar between cohorts. RAPD was associated a shorter length of stay (median 8 days, interquartile range [IQR] 6 to 11) than OPD (median 8 days, IQR 7 to 13) (p = 0.003). However, RAPD was associated with more readmissions (28.1% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

RAPD in patients ≥75 years of age appears to be safe and has a similar complication profile to open PD. Randomized or well-designed prospective matched studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Comparative Efficacy of Robot-Assisted and Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy: A Single-Center Comparative Study

Background

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has become a routine procedure in pancreatic surgery. Although robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) has not been popularized yet, it has shown new advantages in some aspects, and exploring its learning curve is of great significance for guiding clinical practice.

Methods

149 patients who received RDP and LDP in our surgical team were enrolled in this retrospective study. Patients were divided into two groups including LDP group and RDP group. The perioperative outcomes, histopathologic results, long-term postoperative complications, and economic cost were collected and compared between the two groups. The cumulative summation (CUSUM) analysis was used to explore the learning curve of RDP.

Results

The hospital stay, postoperative first exhaust time, and first feeding time in the RDP group were better than those in the LDP group (P < 0.05). The rate of spleen preservation in patients with benign and low-grade tumors in the RDP group was significantly higher than that of the LDP group (P=0.002), though the cost of operation and hospitalization was significantly higher (P < 0.001). The learning curve of RDP in our center declined significantly with completing 32 cases. The average operation time, the hospital stay, and the time of gastrointestinal recovery were shorter after the learning curve node than before.

Conclusion

RDP provides better postoperative recovery and is not difficult to replicate, but the high cost was still a major disadvantage of RDP.

Robotic central pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Central pancreatectomy is usually performed to excise lesions of the neck or proximal body of the pancreas. In the last decade, thanks to the advent of novel technologies, surgeons have started to perform this procedure robotically. This review aims to appraise the results and outcomes of robotic central pancreatectomies (RCP) through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Web Of Science identified studies reporting outcomes of RCP. Pooled prevalence rates of postoperative complications and mortality were computed using random-effect modelling.

RESULTS

Thirteen series involving 265 patients were included. In all cases but one, RCP was performed to excise benign or low-grade tumours. Clinically relevant post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) occurred in 42.3% of patients. While overall complications were reported in 57.5% of patients, only 9.4% had a Clavien-Dindo score ≥ III. Re-operation was necessary in 0.7% of the patients. New-onset diabetes occurred postoperatively in 0.3% of patients and negligible mortality and open conversion rates were observed.

CONCLUSION

RCP is safe and associated with low perioperative mortality and well preserved postoperative pancreatic function, although burdened by high overall morbidity and POPF rates.

Comparison of robotic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy for primary nonampullary duodenal adenocarcinoma: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Robotic surgery has been increasingly applied in pancreatic surgery and showed many advantages over conventional open surgery. The robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) is a surgical option for primary nonampullary duodenal adenocarcinoma (PNDA). However, whether RPD is superior to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for PNDA has not been reported. The comparative study was designed to analyze the short- and long-term outcomes of RPD versus OPD on patients with PNDA.

METHODS

Demographics, perioperative, and survival outcomes among patients who underwent RPD (n = 49) versus OPD (n = 43) for PNDAs between January 2013 and March 2018 were collected and analyzed RESULTS: Demographic characteristics were comparable between the RPD group and the OPD group. The RPD group demonstrated a decreased estimated blood loss (100 vs. 200 ml, p < 0.001), time to oral intake (4.0 vs. 4.0 days, p = 0.04), and postoperative hospital stay (12.9 vs. 15.0 days, p = 0.01) compared with the OPD group. However, no differences were observed between the two groups in terms of operative time and the rates of major complications, grade B and C POPF, PPH, grade B and C DGE, biliary fistular, reoperation, and 90-day readmission. No patient died within 90 days. There were no significant differences in tumor size, differentiation, TNM stage, number of harvested lymph nodes, and the rates of nerve invasion, lymph node invasion, R0 resection, and the median overall survival between the two groups (p > 0.05) CONCLUSIONS: RPD is a safe, feasible, and effective treatment for PNDA compared with OPD and can be used as an alternative for surgeons in the treatment of PNDA. Further multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of RPD in patients with PNDA.

Short-term Outcomes After Robot-Assisted vs Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy After the Learning Curve

Question

What are the actual advantages of robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) after the learning curve?

Findings

In this cohort study of 187 individuals, robot-assisted PD had advantages over open PD in operative time, estimated blood loss, and postoperative hospital stay after the learning curve.

Meaning

The true advantages of robot-assisted PD could be revealed after passing the learning curve.

Importance

Robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has been reported to be safe and feasible. As a new technique, RPD has a learning curve similar to that of other types of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery such as laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. To our knowledge, no reports exist on the outcomes of open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) and RPD after the learning curve.

Objective

To analyze and evaluate the actual advantages of RPD.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Between May 2010 and December 2018, 450 patients underwent RPD in the Shanghai Ruijin Hospital affiliated with Shanghai Jiaotong University in Shanghai, China, a high-volume pancreatic disease center. According to our previous study, an important flexion point in the learning curve is 250 cases. Data on the last 200 RPD cases were collected from January 2017 to December 2018. During that period, 634 patients underwent OPD. These patients were divided into 2 groups, and propensity score matching was used to minimize bias. The demographic data and operative outcomes were collected and analyzed. Analysis began May 2019.

Exposures

Robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy and OPD.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The short-term operative outcomes of RPD and OPD.

Results

After 1:1 matching, 187 cases of RPD and OPD were recorded. In the RPD group, 78 patients (41.7%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 60.9 (11.4) years. In the OPD group, 80 patients (42.8%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 60.1 (10.8) years. Robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy had advantages in operative time (mean [SD], 279.7 [76.3] minutes vs 298.2 [78.3] minutes; P = .02), estimated blood loss (mean [SD], 297.3 [246.8] mL vs 415.2 [497.9] mL; P = .002), and postoperative length of hospital stay (mean [SD], 22.4 [16.7] days vs 26.1 [16.3] days; P = .03). However, there was no significant difference in the R0 resection rate and incidence rate of postoperative complications, such as postoperative pancreatic fistula, bile leak, and delayed gastric emptying. The incidence rates of postoperative bleeding and reoperation in the RPD group were similar to those in the OPD group, with no statistically significant difference.

Conclusions and Relevance

After passing the learning curve, RPD had advantages in operative time and blood loss compared with OPD. There were no differences in postoperative complications such as postoperative pancreatic fistula, bile leak, and delayed gastric emptying. However, patients recovered more quickly after RPD than after OPD. A prospective randomized clinical trial is needed in the future to verify these results.

[Evidence for robotics in oncological pancreatic surgery]

Robotic surgical procedures have been implemented and have become an important development in pancreatic surgery with an increasing acceptance worldwide. Nearly all types of pancreatic surgery have now been performed robotically and especially standardized resections, such as distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and partial pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) have gained importance despite a potentially long learning curve and high associated procedural costs. The present review article summarizes the available literature and evidence on the respective procedures focused on their use for indications of malignancy.

Proposed training pathway with initial experience to set up robotic hepatobiliary and pancreatic service

Although robot-assisted hepatobiliary and pancreatic (HPB) surgery has gained momentum over the last 2 decades, only a handful of units in the world perform major robotic resections. Adaptation of robotic surgery in the UK lags behind its European counterparts and this is mainly because of cost implications in a publicly funded National Health Service (NHS). We describe our experience of setting up a robotic HPB programme with clinical outcomes and propose a training pathway that would help prospective centres in setting up their own robotic HPB service with robust clinical governance oversight. After gaining colleagues' and departmental support, approval from the hospital clinical governance, finance department and new intervention procedure committee was sought. A team of two consultant surgeons, three assistants and three theatre staff went through a structured training programme sponsored mainly by the industry. Surgeon training consisted of online modules, simulation, wet lab, cadaveric training, case observations, proctored procedures followed by independent practice. All major cases were recorded and videos reviewed to improve performance. A total of 111 procedures were successfully completed with robotic assistance between April 2018 and March 2020. The programme started with robot-assisted cholecystectomy as index procedure and progressed on to more complex liver and pancreatic resections including major hepatectomy and Whipple's procedure. The training pathway followed by our team has been effective in setting up a safe robotic HPB programme and could be considered as a roadmap to start new Robotic HPB services.

Analysis of 102 Fully Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomies: Clinical and Financial Outcomes

OBJECTIVES

The value of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) remains undefined. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare and assess clinical outcomes and financial variables of patients undergoing RPD versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) at a single high-volume center.

METHODS

The study design is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of consecutive PD patients from 2013 to 2019. Clinical variables and total hospital charges were evaluated as an unadjusted and adjusted intention-to-treat analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 156 patients (54 OPD, 102 RPD) were identified. In the RPD group, patients were significantly older (P = 0.0304) and had shorter length of stay (mean, 7 vs 11.8 days; P < 0.0001) and longer operative times (mean, 352.7 vs 211.5 minutes; P < 0.0001) compared with OPD. There was no significant difference in 90-day readmissions, bleeding, or complications between OPD and RPD. Adjusted charge analyses show no difference in total charges (P = 0.057).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy is safe, feasible, and valid alternative to OPD. Because of comparable results within each group, randomized trials may be indicated. High-volume RPD centers should collaborate to better understand the differences and advantages over laparoscopic or OPD.

Learning Curve From 450 Cases of Robot-Assisted Pancreaticoduocectomy in a High-Volume Pancreatic Center: Optimization of Operative Procedure and a Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to describe our experience and the learning curve of 450 cases of robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and optimize the surgical process so that our findings can be useful for surgeons starting to perform RPD.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Robotic surgical systems were first introduced 20 years ago. Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a challenging surgery because of its technical difficulty. RPD may overcome some of these difficulties.

METHODS

The medical records of 450 patients who underwent RPD between May 2010 and December 2018 at the Shanghai Ruijin Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Operative times and estimated blood loss (EBL) were analyzed and the learning curve was determined. A cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis was used to identify the inflexion points. Other postoperative outcomes, postoperative complications, and long-term follow-up were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Operative time improved gradually over time from 405.4 ± 112.9 minutes (case 1-50) to 273.6 ± 70 minutes (case 301-350) (P < 0.001). EBL improved from 410 ± 563.5 mL (case 1-50) to 149.0 ± 103.3 mL (case 351-400) (P < 0.001). According to the CUSUM curve, there were 3 phases in the RPD learning curve. The inflexion points were around cases 100 and 250. The incidence of pancreatic leak in the last 350 cases was significantly lower than that in the first 100 cases (30.0% vs 15.1%, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

RPD is safe and feasible for selected patients. Operative and oncologic outcomes were much improved after experience of 250 cases. Our optimization of the surgical process may have also contributed to this. Future prospective and randomized studies are needed to confirm our results.

Learning curves for robotic pancreatic surgery-from distal pancreatectomy to pancreaticoduodenectomy

This study sought to identify the learning curves of console time (CT) for robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). Perioperative outcomes were compared between the early group of surgeries performed early in the learning curve and the late group of surgeries performed after the learning curve.Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a technically demanding and challenging procedure carrying a high morbidity.Data for RDP and RPD were prospectively collected for analysis. The learning curve was assessed by cumulative sum (CUSUM). Based on CUSUM analyses, patients were divided into the early group and the late group.There were 70 RDP and 61 RPD cases. It required 37 cases to overcome the learning curve for RDP and 20 cases for RPD. The median console time was significantly shorter in the late group for both RDP (112 minutes vs 225 minutes, P < .001) and RPD (360 minuntes vs 520 minutes, P < .001). Median blood loss was significantly less in the late group for both RDP (30 cc vs 100 cc, P = .003) and RPD (100 cc vs 200 cc, P < .001). No surgical mortality occurred in either group. Clinically relevant pancreatic fistula rate was 22.9% for RDP (32.4% in the early group vs 12.1% in the late group, P = .043), and 11.5% for RPD (0 in early group vs 17.1% in late group, P = .084).This study demonstrates that the RPD learning curve is 20 cases with prior experience of RDP and confirms the safety and feasibility of both RPD and RDP. Practice and familiarity with the robotic platform are likely to contribute to significant shortening of the learning curve in robotic pancreatic surgery, while knowledge and experience, in addition to practical skills, are also essential to minimize the potential surgical risks of RPD.

Independent Predictors of Increased Operative Time and Hospital Length of Stay Are Consistent Across Different Surgical Approaches to Pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

While minimally invasive approaches are increasingly being utilized for pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), factors associated with prolonged operative time (OpTime) and hospital length of stay (LOS) remain poorly defined, and it is unclear whether these factors are consistent across surgical approaches.

METHODS

The ACS-NSQIP targeted pancreatectomy database from 2014 to 2016 was used to identify all patients who underwent open (OPD), laparoscopic (LPD), or robotic (RPD) pancreatoduodenectomy. Multivariable linear regression analyses were used to evaluate predictors of OpTime and LOS, as well as quantify the changes observed relative to each surgical approach.

RESULTS

Among 10,970 patients, PD procedure types varied: 9963 (92%) open, 418 (4%) laparoscopic, and 409 (4%) robotic. LOS was longer for the open and laparoscopic approaches (11 vs. 11 vs. 10 days, P = 0.0068), whereas OpTime was shortest for OPD (366 vs. 426 vs. 435 min, P < 0.0001). Independent predictors of a prolonged OpTime were ASA class ≥ 3 (P = 0.0002), preoperative XRT (P < 0.0001), pancreatic duct < 3 mm (P = 0.0001), T stage ≥ 3 (P = 0.0108), and vascular resection (P < 0.0001) for OPD; T stage ≥ 3 (P = 0.0510) and vascular resection (P = 0.0062) for LPD; and malignancy (P = 0.0460) and conversion to laparotomy (P = 0.0001) for RPD. Independent predictors of increased LOS were age ≥ 65 years (P = 0.0002), ASA class ≥ 3 (P = 0.0012), hypoalbuminemia (P < 0.0001), and preoperative blood transfusion (P < 0.0001) for OPD as well as an OpTime > 370 min (all p < 0.05) and specific postoperative complications (all p < 0.05) for all surgical approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative risk factors for prolonged OpTime and hospital LOS are relatively consistent across open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches to PD. Particular attention to these factors may help identify opportunities to improve perioperative quality, enhance patient satisfaction, and ensure an efficient allocation of hospital resources.

Robotic surgery trends in general surgical oncology from the National Inpatient Sample

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery is offered at most major medical institutions. The extent of its use within general surgical oncology, however, is poorly understood. We hypothesized that robotic surgery adoption in surgical oncology is increasing annually, that is occurring in all surgical sites, and all regions of the US.

STUDY DESIGN

We identified patients with site-specific malignancies treated with surgical resection from the National Inpatient Sample 2010-2014 databases. Operations were considered robotic if any ICD-9-CM robotic procedure code was used.

RESULTS

We identified 147,259 patients representing the following sites: esophageal (3%), stomach (5%), small bowel (5%), pancreas (7%), liver (5%), and colorectal (75%). Most operations were open (71%), followed by laparoscopic (26%), and robotic (3%). In 2010, only 1.1% of operations were robotic; over the 5-year study period, there was a 5.0-fold increase in robotic surgery, compared to 1.1-fold increase in laparoscopy and 1.2-fold decrease in open surgery (< 0.001). These trends were observed for all surgical sites and in all regions of the US, they were strongest for esophageal and colorectal operations, and in the Northeast. Adjusting for age and comorbidities, odds of having a robotic operation increased annually (5.6 times more likely by 2014), with similar length of stay (6.9 ± 6.5 vs 7.0 ± 6.5, p = 0.52) and rate of complications (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83-1.01, p = 0.08) compared to laparoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic surgery as a platform for minimally invasive surgery is increasing over time for oncologic operations. The growing use of robotic surgery will affect surgical oncology practice in the future, warranting further study of its impact on cost, outcomes, and surgical training.

[Robotic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy : Video article]

Pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy is one of the most complex procedures in general surgery. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy was initially described in 1994; however, its worldwide distribution is so far limited to only a few specialist centers. Robotic surgery using the DaVinci® system can overcome many limitations of laparoscopic surgery. The system is a promising tool for a more widespread introduction of minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic diseases. Mortality rates of 0-5% and pancreatic fistula rates of 0-35% are described in the literature; therefore, thorough complication management is crucial in the postoperative course. The video presents a robotic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary carcinoma in a female patient.

Application of a commercial single-port device for robotic single-incision distal pancreatectomy: initial experience

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy has proven to be feasible and safe. Moreover, robotic surgery provides unique advantages for pancreatic procedures, although single-incision robotic pancreatic surgery is rarely discussed. We applied the single-port modified platform to accomplish robotic distal pancreatectomy in a series of patients.

METHODS

The subjects of this study were ten patients who underwent robotic distal pancreatectomy in our hospital between July 1, 2015 and Dec 31, 2016. All patients were placed supine in the reverse Trendelenburg position with the legs abducted. Surgery was performed via a trans-umbilical 5.0-cm incision, using a modified single-port platform (LAGIPORT^®) combined with the da Vinci Si Surgical System. The three arms and scope (30-degree up) were inserted through the LAGIPORT^® and positioned in a triangle. Endoscopic ultrasound was used to localize the tumor and plan the resection margin. We recorded the surgical time, operation time, blood loss, postoperative pain score, hospital stay, and complications.

RESULTS

The surgical time was 236 ± 32 min, the operation time was 172 ± 30 min, and the blood loss was 149 ± 65 ml. All patients underwent robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy without conversion. The average pain score on postoperative day (POD) 3 was 4.5 ± 1. Complications included subsplenic hematoma (n = 1) and minor pancreatic leakage (n = 2). There was no surgical mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate the safety and efficiency of robotic single-incision distal pancreatectomy via the modified platform (LAGIPORT^®).

Role of robotic-assisted pancreatic surgery: lessons learned from our initial experience

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery has achieved worldwide acceptance in various fields, however, pancreatic surgery remains one of the most challenging abdominal procedures. In fact, the indication for robotic surgery in pancreatic disease has been controversial. The present study aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of robotic pancreatic resection.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed our experience of robotic pancreatic resection done in Sanchinarro University Hospital. Clinicopathologic characteristics, and perioperative and postoperative outcomes were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

From October 2010 to April 2016, 50 patients underwent robotic-assisted surgery for different pancreatic pathologies. All procedures were performed using the da Vinci robotic system. Of the 50 patients, 26 were male and 24 female. The average age of all patients was 62 years. Operative time was 370 minutes. Among the procedures performed were 16 pancreaticoduodenectomies (PD), 23 distal pan-createctomies (DP), 11 tumor enucleations (TE). The mean hospital stay was 17.6 days in PD group, 9.0 days in DP group and 8.4 days in TE group. Pancreatic fistula occurred in 10 cases (20%), 2 after PD, 3 after DP, and 5 after TE. Four patients had postoperative transfusion in PD group and one in DP group. Conversion to open laparotomy occurred in four patients (8%). No serious intraoperative complications were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

From our early experience, robotic pancreatic surgery is a safe and feasible procedure. Further experience and follow-up are required to confirm the role of robotic approach in pancreatic surgery.

Comparison of surgical outcomes between open and robot-assisted minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Robot surgery is a new method that maintains advantages and overcomes disadvantages of conventional methods, even in pancreatic surgery. This study aimed to evaluate safety and benefits of robot-assisted minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (robot PD).

METHODS

This study included 237 patients who underwent PD between 2015 and 2017. Demographics and surgical outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients underwent robot PD and 186 underwent open PD. Robot PD group had younger age (60.7 vs. 65.4 years, P = 0.006) and lower body mass index (22.7 vs. 24.0, P = 0.007). Robot PD group had lower proportion of patients with firm or hard pancreatic texture (15.7% vs. 38.2%, P = 0.004) and smaller pancreatic duct size (2.3 vs. 3.3 mm, P = 0.002). Two groups had similar operation time (robot vs. open: 335.6 vs. 330.1 min) and complications (15.7% vs. 21.0%), including postoperative pancreatic fistula rate (6.0% vs. 12.0%). Robot PD group had lower postoperative pain score (3.7 vs. 4.1 points, P = 0.008), and shorter postoperative stay (10.6 vs. 15.3 days, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Robot PD is comparable to open PD in early outcomes. Robot PD is safe and feasible and enables early recovery; indication for robot PD is expected to expand in the near future.

Is there any role for minimally invasive surgery in NET?

Neuroendocrine tumors (NET) represent the variability of almost benign lesions either secreting hormones occurring as a single lesion up to malignant lesions with metastatic potential. Treatment of NET is usually performed by surgical resection. Due to the rarity of NET, surgical treatment is mainly based on the experience and recommendations of experts and less on the basis of prospective randomized studies. In addition, the development and establishment of new surgical procedures is made more difficult by their rarity. The development of laparoscopic-assisted surgery has significantly improved the treatment of many diseases. Due to the well-known advantages of laparoscopic surgery, this method has also been increasingly used to treat NET. However, due to limited comparative data, the assumed superiority of laparoscopic surgery in the area NET remains often unclear or not yet proven. This review focuses on the present usage of laparoscopic techniques in the area of NET. Relating to the current literature, this review presents the evidence of various laparoscopic procedures for treatment of adrenal, pancreatic and intestine NET as well as extraadrenal pheochromocytoma and neuroendocrine liver metastases. Further, this review focuses on recent new developments of minimally invasive surgery in the area of NET. Here, robotic-assisted surgery and single-port surgery are promising approaches.

Technical considerations for the fully robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy

Minimally invasive surgery, including robotic surgery, has become the standard of care for many abdominal procedures. However, the technical complexity associated with pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) due to the anatomic location and oncologic characteristics of pancreatic tumors has hindered the widespread application of minimally invasive techniques to this procedure. Recent studies have reported that for experienced surgeons, the application of robotic techniques to PD is associated with equivalent oncologic outcomes and rates of complication when compared to an open operation, and may be associated with accelerated surgical recovery. Despite these encouraging results, robotic PD (RPD) is a procedure attempted by a small group of pancreatic surgeons, leading to the great heterogeneity in the techniques used to perform this operation. Herein we describe our technique for fully RPD and demonstrate its execution with a video supplement.

Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Recent Trends

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic resection for cancer represents a real challenge for every surgeon. Recent improvements in laparoscopic experience, minimally invasive surgical techniques and instruments make now the minimally invasive approach a real "triumph." There is no doubt that minimally invasive surgery has replaced with great success conventional surgery in many fields, including surgical oncology.

METHODS AND RESULTS

However, its progress in pancreatic resection for adenocarcinoma has been dramatically slow. Recent evidence supports the notion that minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is safe and feasible and that is becoming the procedure of choice mainly for benign or low-grade malignant lesions in the distal pancreas. On the other side, minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy has not yet been widely accepted and there is enormous skepticism when applied for pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. In this review, we summarize the current evidence on the potential applications of minimally invasive surgical approaches for this aggressive, heterogeneous, and enigmatic type of cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Moreover, the potential future applications of these approaches are discussed with the hope to improve the quality of life as well as the survival rates of pancreatic cancer patients.

Financial Impact of the Robotic Approach in Liver Surgery: A Comparative Study of Clinical Outcomes and Costs Between the Robotic and Open Technique in a Single Institution

BACKGROUND

One of the perceived major drawbacks of minimally invasive techniques has always been its cost. This is especially true for the robotic approach and is one of the main reasons that has prevented its wider acceptance among hospitals and surgeons. The aim of our study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and economic impact of robotic and open liver surgery in a single institution.

METHODS

Sixty-eight robotic and 55 open hepatectomies were performed at our institution between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2013. Demographics, perioperative data, and postoperative outcomes were collected and compared between the two groups. An independent company performed the financial analysis. The economic parameters comprised direct variable costs, direct fixed costs, and indirect costs.

RESULTS

Mean estimated blood loss was significantly less in the robotic group (438 versus 727.8 mL; P = .038). Overall morbidity was significantly lower in the robotic group (22% versus 40%; P = .047). Clavien III/IV complications were also lower, with 4.4% in the robotic versus 16.3% in the open group (P = .043). The length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) was shorter for patients who underwent a robotic procedure (2.1 versus 3.3 days; P = .004). The average total cost, including readmissions, was $37,518 for robotic surgery and $41,948 for open technique.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic liver resections had less overall morbidity, ICU, and hospital stay. This translates into decreased average costs for robotic surgery. These procedures are financially comparable to open resections and do not represent a financial burden to the hospital.

The surgical outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary neoplasms: a comparative study of a single center

BACKGROUND

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a difficult and complex operation. The introduction of robotics has opened up new angles in pancreatic surgery. This study aims to assess the surgical outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy relative to its laparoscopic counterpart.

METHODS

A retrospective study was designed to compare the surgical outcomes of 27 robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and 25 laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD). Perioperative data, including operating time, complication, morbidity and mortality, estimated blood loss, and postoperative length of stay, were analyzed.

RESULTS

The robotic group exhibited significantly shorter operative time (mean 387 vs. 442 min), shorter hospital stay (mean 17 vs. 24 days), and less blood loss (mean 219 vs. 334 ml) than those in the LPD group. No statistical difference was observed between the two groups in terms of complication rate, mortality rate, R0 resection rate, and number of harvested lymph node.

CONCLUSIONS

RPD is more efficient and secure process than LPD among properly selected patients. RPD is therefore a feasible alternative to the laparoscopic procedure. Further studies are needed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of the robotic approach for PD.

National disparities in minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic tumors

BACKGROUND

For patients with pancreatic tumors, several disparities have been shown to impact access to care, including surgery, and subsequently adversely affect long-term oncologic outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate national disparities in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) across different demographics for pancreatic tumors.

METHODS

We utilized the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) to identify patients with pancreatic tumors from 2010 to 2011 who had undergone surgery through either an open or MIS approach. Multivariable analysis was performed to investigate differences in patient characteristics in relation to surgical approach and conversion to open.

RESULTS

A total of 2809 patients were identified. The initial surgical approach included 86.5 % open (2430) and 13.5 % MIS (87.6 % were laparoscopic, and 12.4 % were robotic). Tumor histology was significantly associated with MIS, whereby patients with neuroendocrine tumors were more than twice as likely to have an MIS approach compared to adenocarcinoma. Tumor location within the pancreas was also associated with MIS, with tumors in the tail being three times more likely to be removed through MIS compared to tumors in the head. For patients with disease in the body or tail of the pancreas, ethnicity was independently associated with MIS whereby patients of Hispanic origin were less likely to have MIS. The conversion rate to open was 27.7 %, and geographic location was associated with conversion rates.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS procedures comprise approximately 13.5 % of surgical procedures for pancreatic tumors. In addition to tumor histology, differences in surgical approach were identified with respect to ethnicity for patients with tumors in the body/tail of the pancreas.

Robotic pancreatectomies

Pancreatic surgery represents one of the most challenging fields in general surgery. Its complexity is related to the severity of the disease and the technical skills required for surgical approach. Given this, most pancreatic resections are performed through classic open surgery. Minimally invasive approaches are gradually gaining widespread popularity also in this specific setting, as for distal resections and enucleations. The robotic platform, due to its 3-dimensional vision and articulated movements, represents the natural progress of laparoscopic surgery overcoming the technical defaults and opening up the possibility to perform major pancreatic resections as pancreaticoduodenectomies. This review focuses on the impact of robotic platform in pancreatic surgery in terms of surgical and oncological outcome.

Robotic Pancreatic Resections: Feasibility and Advantages

The robot is an innovative tool to perform complex pancreatic resections. It upgrades conventional laparoscopy by adding specific ergonomic technical details (e.g., EndoWrist). Robotic complex pancreatic operations such as pancreaticoduodenectomy can be carried out safe with equal oncological results, morbidity, and mortality compared to open procedures. The patients benefit from less blood loss, decreased hospitalization, and all other benefits of minimally invasive surgery. Nevertheless, the robot has some limitations like missing haptic feedback and the high costs. It has to find its indications beneath conventional laparoscopic procedures, which is currently extensively discussed. But the available technology is certainly convincing, and a further improvement can be expected which will increase its widespread in the future.

Robot-Assisted Middle Pancreatectomy for Elderly Patients: Our Initial Experience

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the indications, safety, feasibility, and short- and long-term outcomes for elderly patients who underwent robot-assisted middle pancreatectomies (MPs).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ten patients (≥60 years) underwent robot-assisted middle pancreatectomies from 2012 to 2015. The perioperative data, including tumor size, operating time, rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), postoperative morbidity, and other parameters, were analyzed. We collected and analyzed the follow-up information.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients was 64.30 years (range, 60-73 years). The average tumor size was 2.61 cm. The 10 cases were all benign or low-grade malignant lesions. The mean operating time was 175.00 min. The mean blood loss was 113.00 ml with no blood transfusion needed. Postoperative fistulas developed in 5 patients; there were 2 Grade A fistulas and 3 grade B fistulas. There were 3 patients who underwent postoperative complications, including 2 Grade 1 or 2 complications and 1 Grade 3 complication. No reoperation and postoperative mortality occurred. The mean hospital stay was 19.91 days. After a median follow-up of 23 months, new onset of diabetes mellitus developed in 1 patient and none suffered from deterioration of previously diagnosed diabetes or exocrine insufficiency, and no tumor recurrence happened.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted middle pancreatectomy was safe and feasible for elderly people. It had low risk of exocrine or endocrine dysfunction and benefited patients' long-term outcomes. Incidence of POPF was relatively high but we could prevent it from resulting in bad outcomes by scientific perioperative care and systemic treatment.

Transperitoneal robotic resection of benign primary retroperitoneal tumors: can it be widely used?

BACKGROUND

This article was aimed to show the safety, flexibility and other advantages of transperitoneal robot-assisted resection of benign primary retroperitoneal tumors.

METHODS

Ten patients underwent robotic surgeries, and 31 underwent laparotomy surgeries from 2012 to 2014. The perioperative data, including tumor size, operation time, and other parameters were analyzed.

RESULTS

The tumor sizes of the two groups were not different (robotic group vs laparotomy group: 5.47 vs 5.32 cm, respectively; P = 0.777). The differences in the blood loss (robotic group vs laparotomy group: 80.00 vs. 146.08 mL, respectively; P = 0.021), time of oral intake (robotic group vs laparotomy group: 2.12 vs. 3.42 d, respectively; P = 0.045) and post-operation hospital stay (robotic group vs laparotomy group: 5.40 vs. 8.77 d, respectively; P = 0.004) were statistically significant and lower in the robotic group.

CONCLUSION

Robot-assisted resection of benign retroperitoneal tumors is flexible and safe and provides better protection when complex lesions are removed. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: comparison of complications and cost to the open approach

BACKGROUND

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RP) has shown some advantages over open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OP) but no data has been published providing a cost comparison.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of all pancreaticoduodenectomies at a single quaternary cancer referral center was performed. Patient demographics, comorbidities, operative characteristics, complications, and charge data were recorded, and then compared using standard statistical methods.

RESULTS

71 pancreaticoduodenectomies were performed: 22 RP and 49 OP. Patients undergoing OP had similar demographics, comorbidities, pathology, and oncologic characteristics as patients undergoing RP. While operative charges were higher for RP, once inpatient stay associated costs and follow-up costs were included, there was no difference in total costs between RP and OP.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing RP have equivalent rates of R0 resection as OP, and benefit from decreased number of complications, surgical site infections, and length of stay in the intensive care unit. Once cost of complications and follow-up are incorporated, no significant difference between procedures exists. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery - a review

During the past 20 years the application of a minimally invasive approach to pancreatic surgery has progressively increased. Distal pancreatectomy is the most frequently performed procedure, because of the absence of a reconstructive phase. However, middle pancreatectomy and pancreatoduodenectomy have been demonstrated to be safe and feasible as well. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is recognized as the gold standard treatment for small tumors of the pancreatic body-tail, with several advantages over the traditional open approach in terms of patient recovery. The surgical treatment of lesions of the pancreatic head via a minimally invasive approach is still limited to a few highly experienced surgeons, due to the very challenging resection and complex anastomoses. Middle pancreatectomy and enucleation are indicated for small and benign tumors and offer the maximum preservation of the parenchyma. The introduction of a robotic platform more than ten years ago increased the interest of many surgeons in minimally invasive treatment of pancreatic diseases. This new technology overcomes all the limitations of laparoscopic surgery, but actual benefits for the patients are still under investigation. The increased costs associated with robotic surgery are under debate too. This article presents the state of the art of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery.