Published in:
Open Access 18-03-2024 | Pancreatoduodenostomy
Comparing oncologic and surgical outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic cancer: a propensity-matched analysis
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 5/2024
Login to get accessAbstract
Introduction
Minimally invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD), or the Whipple procedure, is increasingly utilized. No study has compared laparoscopic (LPD) and robotic (RPD) approaches, and the impact of the learning curve on oncologic, technical, and post-operative outcomes remains relatively understudied.
Methods
The National Cancer Database was queried for patients undergoing LPD or RPD from 2010 to 2020 with a diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Outcomes were compared between approaches using propensity-score matching (PSM); the impact of annual center-level volume of MIPD was also assessed by dividing volume into quartiles.
Results
A total of 3,342 patients were included. Most (n = 2,716, 81.3%) underwent LPD versus RPD (n = 626, 18.7%). There was a high rate (20.2%, n = 719) of positive margins. Mean length-of-stay (LOS) was 10.4 ± 8.9 days. Thirty-day mortality was 2.8% (n = 92) and ninety-day mortality was 5.7% (n = 189).
PSM matched 625 pairs of patients receiving LPD or RPD. After PSM, there was no differences between groups based on age, sex, race, CCI, T-stage, neoadjuvant chemo/radiotherapy, or type of PD. After PSM, there was a higher rate of conversion to open (HR = 0.68, 95%CI = 0.50–0.92)., but there was no difference in LOS (HR = 1.00, 95%CI = 0.92–1.11), 30-day readmission (HR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.68–1.71), 30-day (HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.39–1.56) or 90-day mortality (HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.42–1.16), ability to receive adjuvant therapy (HR = 1.15, 95% CI = 0.92–1.44), nodal harvest (HR = 1.01, 95%CI = 0.94–1.09) or positive margins (HR = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.89–1.59).
Centers in lower quartiles of annual volume of MIPD demonstrated reduced nodal harvest (p = 0.005) and a higher rate of conversion to open (p = 0.038). Higher-volume centers had a shorter LOS (p = 0.012), higher rate of initiation of adjuvant therapy (p = 0.042), and, most strikingly, a reduction in 90-day mortality (p = 0.033).
Conclusion
LPD and RPD have similar surgical and oncologic outcomes, with a lower rate of conversion to open in the robotic cohort. The robotic technique does not appear to eliminate the “learning curve”, with higher volume centers demonstrating improved outcomes, especially seen at minimum annual volume of 5 cases.