Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sciences 4/2011

01-07-2011 | Topics

Robotic hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a cohort study

Authors: Oliver C. Y. Chan, Chung Ngai Tang, Eric C. H. Lai, George P. C. Yang, Michael K. W. Li

Published in: Journal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sciences | Issue 4/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Robotic surgery has emerged as one of the most promising surgical advances since its launch at the turn of the millennium. Despite its worldwide acceptance in many different surgical specialties, the use of robotic assistance in the field of hepatobiliary and pancreatic (HBP) surgery remains relatively unexplored. This article aims to evaluate the efficacy and outcomes of robotic HBP surgery in a single surgical center.

Methods

Between May 2009 and December 2010, all patients admitted to our unit for robotic HBP surgery were evaluated. A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database on clinical outcomes was performed.

Results

There were 55 robotic HBP operations performed during the study period. There were 27 robotic liver resections (left lateral sectionectomies n = 17, left hepatectomy n = 1, other segmentectomies n = 2 and wedge resections n = 7), 12 robotic pancreatic procedures (Whipple’s operations n = 8, spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomies n = 2, double bypass n = 1 and cystojejunostomy n = 1) and 16 biliary procedures (biliary enteric bypass n = 9, bile duct exploration and related procedures n = 7). The median postoperative hospital stays for robotic liver resections, biliary procedures and pancreatic operations were 5.5 days (range 3–11 days), 6 days (range 4–11 days) and 12 days (range 6–21 days), respectively. Morbidities for liver resection, biliary procedures and pancreatic operations were 7.4, 18 and 33%, respectively. There was no mortality in our series.

Conclusions

Robotic surgery is feasible and can be safely performed in patients with complicated HBP pathologies. Further evaluation with clinical trials is required to validate its real benefits.
Literature
2.
3.
go back to reference Smith CD, Farrel TM, McNatt SS, et al. Assessing laparoscopic manipulative skills. Am J Surg. 2001;181:547–50.PubMedCrossRef Smith CD, Farrel TM, McNatt SS, et al. Assessing laparoscopic manipulative skills. Am J Surg. 2001;181:547–50.PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Patel HP, Linares A, Joseph JV. Robotic and laparoscopic surgery: cost and training. Surg Oncol. 2009;18:242–6.PubMedCrossRef Patel HP, Linares A, Joseph JV. Robotic and laparoscopic surgery: cost and training. Surg Oncol. 2009;18:242–6.PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Maeso S, Reza M, Mayol JA, et al. Efficacy of the Da Vinci Surgical System in abdominal surgery compared with that of laparoscopy, a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2010;252:254–62.PubMedCrossRef Maeso S, Reza M, Mayol JA, et al. Efficacy of the Da Vinci Surgical System in abdominal surgery compared with that of laparoscopy, a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2010;252:254–62.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Waters JA, Canal DF, Wiebke EA, et al. Robotic distal pancreatectomy: cost effective? Surgery. 2010;148(4):814–23.PubMedCrossRef Waters JA, Canal DF, Wiebke EA, et al. Robotic distal pancreatectomy: cost effective? Surgery. 2010;148(4):814–23.PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Choi SB, Park JS, Kim JK, et al. Early experiences of robotic-assisted laparoscopic liver resection. Yonsei Med J. 2008;49(4):632–8.PubMedCrossRef Choi SB, Park JS, Kim JK, et al. Early experiences of robotic-assisted laparoscopic liver resection. Yonsei Med J. 2008;49(4):632–8.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Buchs N, Addeo P, Bianco FM, et al. Outcomes of robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients older than 70 years: a comparative study. World J Surg. 2010;34:2109–14.PubMedCrossRef Buchs N, Addeo P, Bianco FM, et al. Outcomes of robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients older than 70 years: a comparative study. World J Surg. 2010;34:2109–14.PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Giulianotti PC, Sbanan F, Bianco FM, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: single-surgeon experience. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:1646–57.PubMedCrossRef Giulianotti PC, Sbanan F, Bianco FM, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: single-surgeon experience. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:1646–57.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Ntourakis D, Marzano E, Penza PA, et al. Robotic distal splenopancreatectomy: bridging the gap between pancreatic and minimal access surgery. J Gastrointest Surg. 2010;14:1326–30.PubMedCrossRef Ntourakis D, Marzano E, Penza PA, et al. Robotic distal splenopancreatectomy: bridging the gap between pancreatic and minimal access surgery. J Gastrointest Surg. 2010;14:1326–30.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Tan GY, Goel RK, Kaouk JH, et al. Technological advances in robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery. Urol Clin N Am. 2009;36:237–49.CrossRef Tan GY, Goel RK, Kaouk JH, et al. Technological advances in robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery. Urol Clin N Am. 2009;36:237–49.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Nguyen KT, Geller DA. Laparoscopic liver resection—current update. Surg Clin N Am. 2010;90:749–60.PubMedCrossRef Nguyen KT, Geller DA. Laparoscopic liver resection—current update. Surg Clin N Am. 2010;90:749–60.PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Ito K, Ito H, Are C, et al. Laparoscopic versus open liver resection: a matched pair case control study. J Gastrointest Surg. 2009;13(12):2276–83.PubMedCrossRef Ito K, Ito H, Are C, et al. Laparoscopic versus open liver resection: a matched pair case control study. J Gastrointest Surg. 2009;13(12):2276–83.PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Lai EC, Tang CN, Yang GP, et al. Minimally invasive surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: long-term outcome. World J Surg. 2009;33(10):2150–4.PubMedCrossRef Lai EC, Tang CN, Yang GP, et al. Minimally invasive surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: long-term outcome. World J Surg. 2009;33(10):2150–4.PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Vanounou T, Steel J, Nguyen KT, et al. Comparing the clinical and economic impact of laparoscopic versus open liver resection. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(4):998–1009.PubMedCrossRef Vanounou T, Steel J, Nguyen KT, et al. Comparing the clinical and economic impact of laparoscopic versus open liver resection. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(4):998–1009.PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Giulianotti PC, Coratti A, Sbrana F, et al. Robotic liver surgery: results for 70 resections. Surgery. 2011;149:29–39.PubMedCrossRef Giulianotti PC, Coratti A, Sbrana F, et al. Robotic liver surgery: results for 70 resections. Surgery. 2011;149:29–39.PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Ji WB, Wang HG, Zhao ZM, et al. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic anatomic hepatectomy in China, initial experience. Ann Surg. 2011;253:1–7.CrossRef Ji WB, Wang HG, Zhao ZM, et al. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic anatomic hepatectomy in China, initial experience. Ann Surg. 2011;253:1–7.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Berber E, Akyildiz HY, Aucejo F, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic resection of liver tumors. HBP (Oxford). 2010;12(8):583–6. Berber E, Akyildiz HY, Aucejo F, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic resection of liver tumors. HBP (Oxford). 2010;12(8):583–6.
19.
go back to reference Buell JF, Cherqui D, Geller DA, et al. The international position on laparoscopic liver surgery: the Louisville statement, 2008. Ann Surg. 2009;250(5):825–30.PubMedCrossRef Buell JF, Cherqui D, Geller DA, et al. The international position on laparoscopic liver surgery: the Louisville statement, 2008. Ann Surg. 2009;250(5):825–30.PubMedCrossRef
20.
21.
go back to reference Ruurda JP, van Dongen KW, Dries J, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic choledochojejunostomy, comparison to the open approach in an experimental study. Surg Endosc. 2003;17:1937–42.PubMedCrossRef Ruurda JP, van Dongen KW, Dries J, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic choledochojejunostomy, comparison to the open approach in an experimental study. Surg Endosc. 2003;17:1937–42.PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Jayaraman S, Davies W, Schlachta CM. Robot-assisted minimally invasive common bile duct exploration: a Canadian first. Can J Surg. 2008;51(4):93–4. Jayaraman S, Davies W, Schlachta CM. Robot-assisted minimally invasive common bile duct exploration: a Canadian first. Can J Surg. 2008;51(4):93–4.
23.
go back to reference Giulianotti PC, Sbrana F, Bianco FM, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic extended right hepatectomy with biliary reconstruction. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2010;20(2):159–63.PubMedCrossRef Giulianotti PC, Sbrana F, Bianco FM, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic extended right hepatectomy with biliary reconstruction. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2010;20(2):159–63.PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Tang CN, Tsui KK, Ha JP, et al. Laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct: 10-year experience of 174 patients from a single centre. Hong Kong Med J. 2006;12:191–6.PubMed Tang CN, Tsui KK, Ha JP, et al. Laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct: 10-year experience of 174 patients from a single centre. Hong Kong Med J. 2006;12:191–6.PubMed
25.
go back to reference Melvin WS. Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery. Am J Surg. 2003;1863:274–8.CrossRef Melvin WS. Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery. Am J Surg. 2003;1863:274–8.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Chang MK, Dong HK, Woo JL. Ten years of experience with resection of left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: evolution and initial experience to a laparoscopic approach. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:1533–41.CrossRef Chang MK, Dong HK, Woo JL. Ten years of experience with resection of left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: evolution and initial experience to a laparoscopic approach. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:1533–41.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Robotic hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a cohort study
Authors
Oliver C. Y. Chan
Chung Ngai Tang
Eric C. H. Lai
George P. C. Yang
Michael K. W. Li
Publication date
01-07-2011
Publisher
Springer Japan
Published in
Journal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sciences / Issue 4/2011
Print ISSN: 1868-6974
Electronic ISSN: 1868-6982
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00534-011-0389-2

Other articles of this Issue 4/2011

Journal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sciences 4/2011 Go to the issue