Top

Published in:

01-03-2019 | Original Article

Robotic versus standard open pancreatectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis comparison

Authors: Benedetto Ielpo, Riccardo Caruso, Hipolito Duran, Eduardo Diaz, Isabel Fabra, Luis Malavé, Yolanda Quijano, Emilio Vicente

Published in: Updates in Surgery | Issue 1/2019

Abstract

Interest in robotic pancreatectomy has been greatly increasing over the last decade. However, evidence supporting the benefits of robotic over open pancreatectomy is still outstanding. This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic pancreatectomy compared with the conventional open surgical approach. Propensity score-matched (1:1) was used to balance age, sex, BMI, ASA, tumor size, and malignancy of 17 robotic pancreaticoduodenectomies (PD), 12 pancreatic enucleations (PE), and 28 distal pancreatectomies (DP); and was compared with the open standard approach. Robotic PD was associated with longer operative time (594 vs. 413 min; p = 0.03) and decreased blood loss (190 vs. 394 ml; p = 0.001). Robotic PE showed a lower mean length of hospital stay (8.4 vs. 12.8 days; p = 0.04) and, in addition, robotic DP showed less blood loss (175 vs. 375 ml; p = 0.01), less severe morbidities (7.14 vs. 17.9%; p = 0.02), and a reduced mean length of hospital stay (8.9 vs. 15.1; p = 0.001). Overall, conversion rate was 4 (7%). Robotic pancreatectomy is as safe and effective as the standard open surgical approach with reduced blood loss in PD and DP, length of hospital stay in PE and DP, and severe morbidity in DP.

Available only for authorised users

Wente MN, Veit JA, Bassi C, Dervenis C, Fingerhut A, Gouma DJ et al (2007) Post pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH): an International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. Surgery 142:20–25CrossRefPubMed

Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G, Fingerhut A, Yeo C, Izbicki J et al (2005) Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery 138:8–13CrossRefPubMed

Okabayashi T, Nishimori I, Yamashita K, Sugimoto T, Maeda H, Yatabe T et al (2009) Continuous post- operative blood glucose monitoring and control by artificial pancreas in patients having pancreatic resection: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Arch Surg 144:933–937CrossRefPubMed

Edge SB, Fritz AG, Byrd DR (eds) (2010) AJCC cancer staging manual handbook, 7th edn. Springer, New York

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 240:205–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C et al (2017) The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery 161(3):584–591CrossRef

Nishino M, Jackman DM, Hatabu H, Yeap BY, Cioffredi LA, Yap JT et al (2010) New Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Guidelines for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: comparison with original RECIST and impact on assessment of tumor response to targeted therapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195(3):W221–W228CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Memeo R, Sangiuolo F, de Blasi V, Tzedakis S, Mutter D, Marescaux J et al (2016) Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy: state of the art. J Visc Surg 153(5):353–359CrossRefPubMed

Chalikonda S, Aguilar-Saavedra JR, Walsh RM (2012) Laparoscopic robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy: a case-matched comparison with open resection. Surg Endosc 26:2397–2402CrossRefPubMed

10.

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

11.

Bao PQ, Mazirka PO, Watkins KT (2014) Retrospective comparison of robot-assisted minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary neoplasms. J Gastrointest Surg 18:682–689CrossRefPubMed

12.

Buchs NC, Addeo P, Bianco FM, Ayloo S, Benedetti E, Giulianotti PC et al (2011) Robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. World J Surg 35:2739–2746CrossRefPubMed

13.

Chen S, Chen J-Z, Zhan Q, Deng XX, Shen BY, Peng CH et al (2015) Robot-assisted laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a prospective, matched, mid-term follow-up study. Surg Endosc 29:3698–3711CrossRefPubMed

14.

Lai EC, Tang CN (2015) Robotic distal pancreatectomy versus conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a comparative study for short-term outcomes. Front Med 9(3):356–360CrossRefPubMed

15.

Zhou NX, Chen JZ, Liu Q, Zhang X, Wang Z, Ren S et al (2011) Outcomes of pancreatoduodenectomy with robotic surgery versus open surgery. Int J Med Robot 7:131–137CrossRefPubMed

16.

Zhang J, Wu WM, You L, Zhao YP (2013) Robotic versus open pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 20:1774–1780CrossRefPubMed

17.

Napoli N, Kauffmann EF, Menonna F et al (2018) Robotic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis based on factors predictive of postoperative pancreatic fistula. Surg Endosc 32:1234–1247CrossRefPubMed

18.

Kooby DA, Gillespie T, Bentrem D, Nakeeb A, Schmidt MC, Merchant NB et al (2008) Left-sided pancreatectomy: a multicenter comparison of laparoscopic and open approaches. Ann Surg 248:438–446PubMed

19.

Lee SY, Allen PJ, Sadot E, D’Angelica MI, DeMatteo RP, Fong Y et al (2015) Distal pancreatectomy: a single institution’s experience in open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches. J Am Coll Surg 220:18–27CrossRefPubMed

20.

Fernández-Cruz L, Cosa R, Blanco L, Levi S, López-Boado MA, Navarro S (2007) Curative laparoscopic resection for pancreatic neoplasms: a critical analysis from a single institution. J Gastrointest Surg 11:1607–1621CrossRefPubMed

21.

Kim SC, Park KT, Hwang JW, Shin HC, Lee SS, Seo DW et al (2008) Comparative analysis of clinical outcomes for laparoscopic distal pancreatic resection and open distal pancreatic resection at a single institution. Surg Endosc 22:2261–2268CrossRefPubMed

22.

Giulianotti PC, Sbrana F, Bianco FM, Elli EF, Shah G, Addeo P et al (2010) Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: single-surgeon experience. Surg Endosc 24:1646–1657CrossRefPubMed

23.

Duran H, Ielpo B, Caruso R, Ferri V, Quijano Y, Diaz E et al (2014) Does robotic distal pancreatectomy surgery offer similar results as laparoscopic and open approach? A comparative study from a single medical center. Int J Med Robot 10(3):280–285CrossRefPubMed

24.

Napoli N, Kauffmann EF, Palmeri M et al (2016) The learning curve in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Dig Surg 33(4):299–307CrossRefPubMed

25.

Napoli N, Kauffmann EF, Menonna F, Perrone VG, Brozzetti S, Boggi U (2016) Indications, technique, and results of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. Updates Surg 68(3):295–305CrossRefPubMed

26.

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

27.

Jayaraman S, Gonen M, Brennan MF, D’Angelica MI, DeMatteo RP, Fong Y et al (2010) Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: evolution of a technique at a single institution. J Am Coll Surg 211:503–509CrossRefPubMed

28.

Shi Y, Peng C, Shen B, Deng X, Jin J, Wu Z et al (2016) Pancreatic enucleation using the da Vinci robotic surgical system: a report of 26 cases. Int J Med Robot 12(4):751–757CrossRefPubMed

29.

Tian F, Hong XF, Wu WM, Han XL, Wang MY, Cong L et al (2016) Propensity score-matched analysis of robotic versus open surgical enucleation for small pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours. Br J Surg 103(10):1358–1364CrossRefPubMed

30.

Røsok BI, de Rooij T, van Hilst J, Diener MK, Allen PJ, Vollmer CM et al (2017) Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy. HPB (Oxford) 19(3):205–214CrossRef

Title: Robotic versus standard open pancreatectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis comparison
Authors: Benedetto Ielpo
Riccardo Caruso
Hipolito Duran
Eduardo Diaz
Isabel Fabra
Luis Malavé
Yolanda Quijano
Emilio Vicente
Publication date: 01-03-2019
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Published in: Updates in Surgery / Issue 1/2019
Print ISSN: 2038-131X
Electronic ISSN: 2038-3312
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-018-0529-1

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Robotic versus standard open pancreatectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis 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 1/2019

Hyponatremia could identify patients with intrabdominal sepsis and anastomotic leak after colorectal surgery: a systematic review of the literature

Application of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery: an Italian survey

Video-assisted ablation of pilonidal sinus (VAAPS) versus sinusectomy for treatment of chronic pilonidal sinus disease: a comparative study

Correction to: Gastroesophageal reflux disease: from heartburn to Barrett esophagus, and beyond

Right colectomy: consecutive 100 patients treated with laparoscopic and robotic technique for malignancy. Cumulative experience in a single centre

Outcomes and indications for emergency thoracotomy after adoption of a more liberal policy in a western European level 1 trauma centre: 8-year experience