Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 8/2018

01-08-2018

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a French prospective single-center experience and cost-effectiveness analysis

Authors: Regis Souche, Astrid Herrero, Guillaume Bourel, John Chauvat, Isabelle Pirlet, Françoise Guillon, David Nocca, Frederic Borie, Gregoire Mercier, Jean-Michel Fabre

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 8/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Benefits and cost-effectiveness of robotic approach for distal pancreatectomy (DP) remain debated. In this prospective study, we aim to compare the short-term results and real costs of robotic (RDP) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP).

Methods

From 2011 until 2016, all consecutive patients underwent minimally invasive DP were included and data were prospectively collected. Patients were assigned in two groups, RDP and LDP, according to the availability of the Da Vinci® Surgical System for our Surgical Unit.

Results

A minimally invasive DP was performed in 38 patients with a median age of 61 years old (44–83 years old) and a BMI of 26 kg/m2 (20–31 kg/m2). RDP group (n = 15) and LDP group (n = 23) were comparable concerning demographic data, BMI, ASA score, comorbidities, malignant lesions, lesion size, and indication of spleen preservation. Median operative time was longer in RDP (207 min) compared to LDP (187 min) (p = 0.047). Conversion rate, spleen preservation failure, and perioperative transfusion rates were nil in both groups. Pancreatic fistula was diagnosed in 40 and 43% (p = 0.832) of patients and was grade A in 83 and 80% (p = 1.000) in RDP and LDP groups, respectively. Median postoperative hospital stay was similar in both groups (RDP: 8 days vs. LDP: 9 days, p = 0.310). Major complication occurred in 7% in RDP group and 13% in LDP group (p = 1.000). Ninety-days mortality was nil in both groups. No difference was found concerning R0 resection rate and median number of retrieved lymph nodes. Total cost of RDP was higher than LDP (13611 vs. 12509 €, p < 0.001). The difference between mean hospital incomes and costs was negative in RDP group contrary to LDP group (− 1269 vs. 1395 €, p = 0.040).

Conclusion

Short-term results of RDP seem to be similar to LDP but the high cost of RDP makes this approach not cost-effective actually.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Merchant NB, Parikh AA, Kooby DA (2009) Should all distal pancreatectomies be performed laparoscopically? Adv Surg 43:283–300CrossRefPubMed Merchant NB, Parikh AA, Kooby DA (2009) Should all distal pancreatectomies be performed laparoscopically? Adv Surg 43:283–300CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Marangos IP, Buanes T, Rosok BI, Kazaryan AM, Rosseland AR, Grzyb K et al (2012) Laparoscopic resection of exocrine carcinoma in central and distal pancreas results in a high rate of radical resections and long postoperative survival. Surgery 151(5):717–723CrossRefPubMed Marangos IP, Buanes T, Rosok BI, Kazaryan AM, Rosseland AR, Grzyb K et al (2012) Laparoscopic resection of exocrine carcinoma in central and distal pancreas results in a high rate of radical resections and long postoperative survival. Surgery 151(5):717–723CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Kang CM, Lee SH, Lee WJ (2014) Minimally invasive radical pancreatectomy for left-sided pancreatic cancer: current status and future perspectives. World J Gastroenterol 20(9):2343–2351CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kang CM, Lee SH, Lee WJ (2014) Minimally invasive radical pancreatectomy for left-sided pancreatic cancer: current status and future perspectives. World J Gastroenterol 20(9):2343–2351CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Kang CM, Kim DH, Lee WJ (2010) Ten years of experience with resection of left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: evolution and initial experience to a laparoscopic approach. Surg Endosc 24(7):1533–1541CrossRefPubMed Kang CM, Kim DH, Lee WJ (2010) Ten years of experience with resection of left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: evolution and initial experience to a laparoscopic approach. Surg Endosc 24(7):1533–1541CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Hu M, Zhao G, Wang F, Zhao Z, Li C, Liu R (2014) Laparoscopic versus open distal splenopancreatectomy for the treatment of pancreatic body and tail cancer: a retrospective, mid-term follow-up study at a single academic tertiary care institution. Surg Endosc 28(9):2584–2591CrossRefPubMed Hu M, Zhao G, Wang F, Zhao Z, Li C, Liu R (2014) Laparoscopic versus open distal splenopancreatectomy for the treatment of pancreatic body and tail cancer: a retrospective, mid-term follow-up study at a single academic tertiary care institution. Surg Endosc 28(9):2584–2591CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Zeh HJ 3rd, Bartlett DL, Moser AJ (2011) Robotic-assisted major pancreatic resection. Adv Surg 45:323–340CrossRefPubMed Zeh HJ 3rd, Bartlett DL, Moser AJ (2011) Robotic-assisted major pancreatic resection. Adv Surg 45:323–340CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference 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(7):1646–1657CrossRefPubMed 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(7):1646–1657CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Collinson FJ, Jayne DG, Pigazzi A, Tsang C, Barrie JM, Edlin R et al (2012) An international, multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial of robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 27(2):233–241CrossRefPubMed Collinson FJ, Jayne DG, Pigazzi A, Tsang C, Barrie JM, Edlin R et al (2012) An international, multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial of robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 27(2):233–241CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Waters JA, Canal DF, Wiebke EA, Dumas RP, Beane JD, Aguilar-Saavedra JR et al (2010) Robotic distal pancreatectomy: cost effective? Surgery 148(4):814–823CrossRefPubMed Waters JA, Canal DF, Wiebke EA, Dumas RP, Beane JD, Aguilar-Saavedra JR et al (2010) Robotic distal pancreatectomy: cost effective? Surgery 148(4):814–823CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Garber AM, Phelps CE (1997) Economic foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis. J Health Econ 16(1):1–31CrossRefPubMed Garber AM, Phelps CE (1997) Economic foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis. J Health Econ 16(1):1–31CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Butturini G, Damoli I, Crepaz L, Malleo G, Marchegiani G, Daskalaki D et al (2015) A prospective non-randomised single-center study comparing laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy. Surg Endosc 29(11):3163–3170CrossRefPubMed Butturini G, Damoli I, Crepaz L, Malleo G, Marchegiani G, Daskalaki D et al (2015) A prospective non-randomised single-center study comparing laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy. Surg Endosc 29(11):3163–3170CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Mehta SS, Doumane G, Mura T, Nocca D, Fabre JM (2012) Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a single-institution case-control study. Surg Endosc 26(2):402–407CrossRefPubMed Mehta SS, Doumane G, Mura T, Nocca D, Fabre JM (2012) Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a single-institution case-control study. Surg Endosc 26(2):402–407CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Kimura W, Yano M, Sugawara S, Okazaki S, Sato T, Moriya T et al (2010) Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with conservation of the splenic artery and vein: techniques and its significance. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 17(6):813–823CrossRefPubMed Kimura W, Yano M, Sugawara S, Okazaki S, Sato T, Moriya T et al (2010) Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with conservation of the splenic artery and vein: techniques and its significance. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 17(6):813–823CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Warshaw AL (1988) Conservation of the spleen with distal pancreatectomy. Arch Surg 123(5):550–553CrossRefPubMed Warshaw AL (1988) Conservation of the spleen with distal pancreatectomy. Arch Surg 123(5):550–553CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Strasberg SM, Linehan DC, Hawkins WG (2007) Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy procedure for adenocarcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas: ability to obtain negative tangential margins. J Am Coll Surg 204(2):244–249CrossRefPubMed Strasberg SM, Linehan DC, Hawkins WG (2007) Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy procedure for adenocarcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas: ability to obtain negative tangential margins. J Am Coll Surg 204(2):244–249CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference 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(1):8–13CrossRefPubMed 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(1):8–13CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Wente MN, Veit JA, Bassi C, Dervenis C, Fingerhut A, Gouma DJ et al (2007) Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH): an International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. Surgery 142(1):20–25CrossRefPubMed Wente MN, Veit JA, Bassi C, Dervenis C, Fingerhut A, Gouma DJ et al (2007) Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH): an International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. Surgery 142(1):20–25CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference 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(2):205–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral 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(2):205–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
go back to reference Mise Y, Day RW, Vauthey JN, Brudvik KW, Schwarz L, Prakash L et al (2015) After pancreatectomy, the “90 days from surgery” definition is superior to the “30 days from discharge” definition for capture of clinically relevant readmissions. J Gastrointest Surg 20:77–84CrossRef Mise Y, Day RW, Vauthey JN, Brudvik KW, Schwarz L, Prakash L et al (2015) After pancreatectomy, the “90 days from surgery” definition is superior to the “30 days from discharge” definition for capture of clinically relevant readmissions. J Gastrointest Surg 20:77–84CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D et al (2013) Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS) statement. BMJ 346:f1049CrossRefPubMed Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D et al (2013) Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS) statement. BMJ 346:f1049CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Daouadi M, Zureikat AH, Zenati MS, Choudry H, Tsung A, Bartlett DL et al (2013) Robot-assisted minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is superior to the laparoscopic technique. Ann Surg 257(1):128–132CrossRefPubMed Daouadi M, Zureikat AH, Zenati MS, Choudry H, Tsung A, Bartlett DL et al (2013) Robot-assisted minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is superior to the laparoscopic technique. Ann Surg 257(1):128–132CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference de’Angelis N, Alghamdi S, Renda A, Azoulay D, Brunetti F (2015) Initial experience of robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy for transverse colon cancer: a matched case-control study. World J Surg Oncol 13:295CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral de’Angelis N, Alghamdi S, Renda A, Azoulay D, Brunetti F (2015) Initial experience of robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy for transverse colon cancer: a matched case-control study. World J Surg Oncol 13:295CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Gavriilidis P, Lim C, Menahem B, Lahat E, Salloum C, Azoulay D (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy—The first meta-analysis. HPB 18(7):567–574CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gavriilidis P, Lim C, Menahem B, Lahat E, Salloum C, Azoulay D (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy—The first meta-analysis. HPB 18(7):567–574CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference Kang CM, Kim DH, Lee WJ, Chi HS (2011) Conventional laparoscopic and robot-assisted spleen-preserving pancreatectomy: does da Vinci have clinical advantages? Surg Endosc 25(6):2004–2009CrossRefPubMed Kang CM, Kim DH, Lee WJ, Chi HS (2011) Conventional laparoscopic and robot-assisted spleen-preserving pancreatectomy: does da Vinci have clinical advantages? Surg Endosc 25(6):2004–2009CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a French prospective single-center experience and cost-effectiveness analysis
Authors
Regis Souche
Astrid Herrero
Guillaume Bourel
John Chauvat
Isabelle Pirlet
Françoise Guillon
David Nocca
Frederic Borie
Gregoire Mercier
Jean-Michel Fabre
Publication date
01-08-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 8/2018
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6080-9

Other articles of this Issue 8/2018

Surgical Endoscopy 8/2018 Go to the issue