Top

Published in:

01-06-2020 | Original Article

Robotic-assisted versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: the results of a case-matched comparison

Authors: Marco Vito Marino, Mauro Podda, Marcos Gomez Ruiz, Carmen Cagigas Fernandez, Domenico Guarrasi, Manuel Gomez Fleitas

Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery | Issue 3/2020

Abstract

Robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) is progressively gaining momentum. It seems to provide some potential advantages over open approach. Unfortunately, only few studies investigated the impact of RPD on the oncologic outcomes. We performed a 1:1 case-matched comparison between two groups of 35 patients affected by a malignant tumor who underwent RPD and open (OPD) pancreaticoduodenectomy from August 2014 to April 2016. Operative time was longer in the RPD group compared to OPD (355 vs 262 min, p = 0.023), whereas median blood loss (235 vs 575 ml, p = 0.016) and length of hospitalization (6.5 vs 8.9 days, p = 0.041) were lower for RPD. A significant reduction of overall postoperative morbidity rate was found in the RPD group compared to the OPD group (31.4% vs 48.6% p = 0.034). No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of overall pancreatic fistula rate, R0 resection rate, and number of harvested lymph nodes. The overall and disease-free survival at 1 and 3 years were similar. RPD is a safe and effective technique. It reduces the estimated blood loss, the length hospital of stay and the rate of complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy, while preserving a good oncologic adequacy.

Available only for authorised users

Gagner M, Pomp A (1994) Laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc 8:408–410CrossRef

Wang M, Cai H, Meng L et al (2016) Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy: a comprehensive review. Int J Surg. 35:139–146CrossRef

Asbun HJ, Stauffer JA (2012) Laparoscopic vs open pancreaticioduodenectomy: overall outcomes and severity of complications using the Accordion Severity Grading System. J Am Coll Surg 215:810–819CrossRef

Giulianotti PC, Coratti A, Angelini M et al (2003) Robotics in general surgery; Personal experience in a large community hospital. Arch Surg 138:777–784CrossRef

Kang CM, Kim DH, Lee WJ et al (2011) Conventional laparoscopic and robot-assisted spleen preserving pancreatectomy: does da Vinci have clinical advantages? Surg Endosc 25:2004–2009CrossRef

Lei P, Wei B, Guo W et al (2014) Minimally invasive surgical approach compared with open pancreaticoduodenectomy a systematic review and meta-analysis on the feasibility and safety. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 24:296–305CrossRef

Pędziwiatr M, Małczak P, Pisarska M et al (2017) Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy-systematic review and meta-analysis. Langenbecks Arch Surg 402:841–851CrossRef

Lyu Y, Cheng Y, Wang B et al (2018) Minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: an up-to-date meta-analysis of comparative cohort studies. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2018.0460 CrossRefPubMed

Boggi U, Amorese G, Vistoli F et al (2015) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic literature review. Surg Endosc 29:9–23CrossRef

10.

Coratti A, Di Marino M, Coratti F et al (2016) Initial experience with robotic pancreatic surgery: technical feasbility and oncological implications. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 26:31–37CrossRef

11.

Zureikat AH, Moser AJ, Boone BA et al (2013) robotic pancreatic resection: safety and feasibility. Ann Surg 258(4):554–562CrossRef

12.

Peng L, Lin S, Li Y et al (2017) Systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc 31:3085–3097CrossRef

13.

Boggi U, Palladino S, Massimetti G et al (2015) Laparoscopic robot-assisted versus open total pancreatectomy: a case-matched study. Surg Endosc 29:1425–1432CrossRef

15.

Marino MV, Mirabella A, Guarrasi D, Lupo M, Komorowski AL (2019) Robotic-assisted repair of iatrogenic common bile duct injury after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: surgical technique and outcomes. Int J Med Robot 15(3):e1992. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1992 CrossRefPubMed

16.

Marino MV, Gulotta G, Komorowski AL (2019) Fully robotic left hepatectomy for malignant tumor: technique and initial results. Updates Surg 71:129–135CrossRef

17.

Marino MV, Shabat G, Guarrasi D et al (2019) Comparative study of the initial experience in performing robotic and laparoscopic right hepatectomy with technical description of the robotic technique. Dig Surg 36:241–250CrossRef

18.

Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213CrossRef

19.

Koch M, Garden OJ, Padbury R et al (2011) Bile leakage after hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a definition and grading of severity by the international study group of liver surgery. Surgery 149:680–688CrossRef

20.

Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C et al (2017) International study group on pancreatic surgery (ISGPS). The 2016 update of the international study group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery 161:584–591CrossRef

21.

Wente MN, Bassi C, Dervenis C et al (2007) Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Surgery 142:761–768CrossRef

22.

Verbeke CS, Leitch D, Menon KV et al (2015) Redefining the R1 resection in pancreatic cancer. Br J Surg 93:1232–1237CrossRef

23.

Marino MV, Shabat G, Gulotta G et al (2018) From Illusion to reality: a brief history of robotic surgery. Surg Innov 25:291–296CrossRef

24.

Vasilescu C, Sgrabura O, Tudor S et al (2009) Robotic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy. A case report. Acta Chir Belg 109:396–399CrossRef

25.

Abood GJ, Can MF, Daouadi M et al (2013) Robotic-assisted minimally invasive central pancreatectomy: technique and outcomes. J Gastrointest Surg 17:1002–1008CrossRef

26.

Kauffmann EF, Napoli N, Menonna F et al (2016) Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy with vascular resection. Langenbecks Arch Surg 401:1111–1122CrossRef

27.

Levi Sandri GB, de Werra E, Mascianà G et al (2017) The use of robotic surgery in abdominal organ transplantation: a literature review. Clin Transplant. https://doi.org/10.1111/ctr.12856 CrossRefPubMed

28.

Nussbaum DP, Adam MA, Youngwirth LM et al (2016) Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy does not improve use for time to initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 23:1026–1033CrossRef

29.

Adam MA, Choudhury K, Dinan MA et al (2015) Minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for cancer: practice patterns and short-term outcomes among 7601 patients. Ann Surg 262:372–377CrossRef

30.

Rosemurgy A, Ross S, Bordeau T et al (2019) Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy is the future: here and now. J Am Coll Surg. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2018.12.040 CrossRefPubMed

31.

Zureikat AH, Postlewait LM, Liu Y et al (2016) A Multi-institutional comparison of perioperative outcomes of robotic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 264:640–649CrossRef

32.

Zureikat AH, Moser AJ, Boone BA et al (2013) Robotic pancreatic resection: safety and feasibility. Ann Surg 258:554–562CrossRef

33.

Liao CH, Wu YT, Liu YY et al (2016) Systematic review of the feasibility and advantage of minivasive pancreaticoduodenectomy. World J Surg 40:1218–1225CrossRef

34.

Zeh HJ, Zureikat AH, Secrest A et al (2012) Outcomes after robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary lesions. Ann Surg Oncol 19:864–870CrossRef

35.

Polanco PM, Zenati MS, Hogg ME et al (2016) An analysis of risk factors for pancreatic fistula after robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: outcomes from a consecutive series of standardized pancreatic reconstructions. Surg Endosc 30:1523–1529CrossRef

36.

Hu BY, Wan T, Zhang WZ, Dong JH (2016) Risk factors for postoperative pancreatic fistula: analysis of 539 successive cases of pancreaticoduodenectomy. World J Gastroenterol 22(34):7797–7805CrossRef

37.

Malgras B, Duron S, Gaujoux S et al (2016) Early biliary complications following pancreaticoduodenectomy: prevalence and risk factors. HPB (Oxford) 18:367–374CrossRef

38.

Wright GP, Zureikat AH (2016) Development of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery: an evidence-based systematic review of laparoscopic versus robotic approaches. J Gastrointest Surg 20:1658–1665CrossRef

39.

Giulianotti PC, Sbrana F, Bianco FM et al (2010) Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: single-surgeon experience. Surg Endosc 24:1646–1657CrossRef

40.

Croome KP, Farnell MB, Que FG et al (2014) Total laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: oncologic advantages over open approaches? Ann Surg 260:633–640CrossRef

41.

Boone BA, Zenati M, Hogg ME et al (2015) Assesment of quality outcomes for robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: identification of the learning curve. JAMA Surg 29:9–23

42.

Correa-Gallego C, Dinkelspiel HE, Sulimanoff I et al (2014) Minimally-invasive vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Surg 218:129–139CrossRef

43.

Alexander M, Blum R, Burbury K et al (2017) Timely initiation of chemotherapy: a systematic literature review of six priority cancers - results and recommendations for clinical practice. Intern Med J 47:16–34CrossRef

44.

Boggi U, Napoli N, Costa F et al (2016) Robotic-assisted pancreatic resection. World J Surg 40:2497–2506CrossRef

45.

Baker EH, Ross SW, Seshadri R et al (2015) Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: role in 2014 and beyond. J Gastrointest Oncol 6:396–405PubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Robotic-assisted versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: the results of a case-matched comparison
Authors: Marco Vito Marino
Mauro Podda
Marcos Gomez Ruiz
Carmen Cagigas Fernandez
Domenico Guarrasi
Manuel Gomez Fleitas
Publication date: 01-06-2020
Publisher: Springer London
Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery / Issue 3/2020
Print ISSN: 1863-2483
Electronic ISSN: 1863-2491
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-019-01018-w

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Robotic-assisted versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: the results of a case-matched comparison

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2020

Ergonomic assessment of robotic general surgeons: a pilot study

Multivisceral robotic liver surgery: feasible and safe

Surgical resection for diverticulitis using robotic natural orifice intracorporeal anastomosis and transrectal extraction approach: the NICE procedure

Totally robotic right hemicolectomy: a multicentre case-matched technical and peri-operative comparison of port placements and da Vinci models

Robotic surgery does not affect upstaging of T1 renal masses

Can we predict who will need lymphocele drainage following robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP)?