Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 11/2023

Open Access 15-09-2023 | Pancreatectomy

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in obese patients

Authors: Fabio Ausania, Filippo Landi, John B. Martinie, Dionisios Vrochides, Matthew Walsh, Shanaz M. Hossain, Steven White, Viswakumar Prabakaran, Laleh G. Melstrom, Yuman Fong, Giovanni Butturini, Laura Bignotto, Valentina Valle, Yuntao Bing, Dianrong Xiu, Gregorio Di Franco, Francisco Sanchez-Bueno, Nicola de’Angelis, Alexis Laurent, Giuseppe Giuliani, Graziano Pernazza, Alessandro Esposito, Roberto Salvia, Francesca Bazzocchi, Ludovica Esposito, Andrea Pietrabissa, Luigi Pugliese, Riccardo Memeo, Ichiro Uyama, Yuichiro Uchida, José Rios, Andrea Coratti, Luca Morelli, Pier C. Giulianotti

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 11/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Although robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) has a lower conversion rate to open surgery and causes less blood loss than laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), clear evidence on the impact of the surgical approach on morbidity is lacking. Prior studies have shown a higher rate of complications among obese patients undergoing pancreatectomy. The primary aim of this study is to compare short-term outcomes of RDP vs. LDP in patients with a BMI ≥ 30.

Methods

In this multicenter study, all obese patients who underwent RDP or LDP for any indication between 2012 and 2022 at 18 international expert centers were included. The baseline characteristics underwent inverse probability treatment weighting to minimize allocation bias.

Results

Of 446 patients, 219 (50.2%) patients underwent RDP. The median age was 60 years, the median BMI was 33 (31–36), and the preoperative diagnosis was ductal adenocarcinoma in 21% of cases. The conversion rate was 19.9%, the overall complication rate was 57.8%, and the 90-day mortality rate was 0.7% (3 patients). RDP was associated with a lower complication rate (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52–0.89; p = 0.005), less blood loss (150 vs. 200 ml; p < 0.001), fewer blood transfusion requirements (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.15–0.50; p < 0.001) and a lower Comprehensive Complications Index (8.7 vs. 8.9, p < 0.001) than LPD. RPD had a lower conversion rate (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.19–0.39; p < 0.001) and achieved better spleen preservation rate (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.13–3.39; p = 0.016) than LPD.

Conclusions

In obese patients, RDP is associated with a lower conversion rate, fewer complications and better short-term outcomes than LPD.
Literature
1.
go back to reference De Rooij T, Van Hilst J, Van Santvoort H, Boerma D, Van Den Boezem P, Daams F, Van Dam R, Dejong C, Van Duyn E, Dijkgraaf M, Van Eijck C, Festen S, Gerhards M, Groot Koerkamp B, De Hingh I, Kazemier G, Klaase J, De Kleine R, Van Laarhoven C, Luyer M, Patijn G, Steenvoorde P, Suker M, Abu Hilal M, Busch O, Besselink M (2019) Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy (Leopard). Ann Surg 269:2–9CrossRefPubMed De Rooij T, Van Hilst J, Van Santvoort H, Boerma D, Van Den Boezem P, Daams F, Van Dam R, Dejong C, Van Duyn E, Dijkgraaf M, Van Eijck C, Festen S, Gerhards M, Groot Koerkamp B, De Hingh I, Kazemier G, Klaase J, De Kleine R, Van Laarhoven C, Luyer M, Patijn G, Steenvoorde P, Suker M, Abu Hilal M, Busch O, Besselink M (2019) Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy (Leopard). Ann Surg 269:2–9CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Van Hilst J, De Rooij T, Klompmaker S, Rawashdeh M, Aleotti F, Al-Sarireh B, Alseidi A, Ateeb Z, Balzano G, Berrevoet F, Björnsson B, Boggi U, Busch OR, Butturini G, Casadei R, Del Chiaro M, Chikhladze S, Cipriani F, Van Dam R, Damoli I, Van Dieren S, Dokmak S, Edwin B, Van Eijck C, Fabre J-M, Falconi M, Farges O, Fernández-Cruz L, Forgione A, Frigerio I, Fuks D, Gavazzi F, Gayet B, Giardino A, Groot Koerkamp B, Hackert T, Hassenpflug M, Kabir I, Keck T, Khatkov I, Kusar M, Lombardo C, Marchegiani G, Marshall R, Menon KV, Montorsi M, Orville M, De Pastena M, Pietrabissa A, Poves I, Primrose J, Pugliese R, Ricci C, Roberts K, Røsok B, Sahakyan MA, Sánchez-Cabús S, Sandström P, Scovel L, Solaini L, Soonawalla Z, Souche FR, Sutcliffe RP, Tiberio GA, Tomazic A, Troisi R, Wellner U, White S, Wittel UA, Zerbi A, Bassi C, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M (2019) Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma (Diploma). Ann Surg 269:10–7CrossRefPubMed Van Hilst J, De Rooij T, Klompmaker S, Rawashdeh M, Aleotti F, Al-Sarireh B, Alseidi A, Ateeb Z, Balzano G, Berrevoet F, Björnsson B, Boggi U, Busch OR, Butturini G, Casadei R, Del Chiaro M, Chikhladze S, Cipriani F, Van Dam R, Damoli I, Van Dieren S, Dokmak S, Edwin B, Van Eijck C, Fabre J-M, Falconi M, Farges O, Fernández-Cruz L, Forgione A, Frigerio I, Fuks D, Gavazzi F, Gayet B, Giardino A, Groot Koerkamp B, Hackert T, Hassenpflug M, Kabir I, Keck T, Khatkov I, Kusar M, Lombardo C, Marchegiani G, Marshall R, Menon KV, Montorsi M, Orville M, De Pastena M, Pietrabissa A, Poves I, Primrose J, Pugliese R, Ricci C, Roberts K, Røsok B, Sahakyan MA, Sánchez-Cabús S, Sandström P, Scovel L, Solaini L, Soonawalla Z, Souche FR, Sutcliffe RP, Tiberio GA, Tomazic A, Troisi R, Wellner U, White S, Wittel UA, Zerbi A, Bassi C, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M (2019) Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma (Diploma). Ann Surg 269:10–7CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Gavriilidis P, Roberts KJ, Sutcliffe RP (2019) Comparison of robotic vs laparoscopic vs open distal pancreatectomy. A systematic review and network meta-analysis. HPB 21:1268–1276CrossRefPubMed Gavriilidis P, Roberts KJ, Sutcliffe RP (2019) Comparison of robotic vs laparoscopic vs open distal pancreatectomy. A systematic review and network meta-analysis. HPB 21:1268–1276CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Kamarajah SK, Sutandi N, Robinson SR, French JJ, White SA (2019) Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. HPB 21:1107–18CrossRefPubMed Kamarajah SK, Sutandi N, Robinson SR, French JJ, White SA (2019) Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. HPB 21:1107–18CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Müller PC, Breuer E, Nickel F, Zani S Jr, Kauffmann E, De Franco L, Tschuor C, Suno Krohn P, Burgdorf SK, Jonas JP, Oberkofler CE, Petrowsky H, Saint-Marc O, Seelen L, Molenaar IQ, Wellner U, Keck T, Coratti A, Van Dam C, De Wilde R, Koerkamp BG, Valle V, Giulianotti P, Ghabi E, Moskal D, Lavu H, Vrochides D, Martinie J, Yeo C, Sánchez-Velázquez P, Ielpo B, Ajay P, Shah MM, Kooby DA, Gao S, Hao J, He J, Boggi U, Hackert T, Allen P, Borel-Rinkes IHM, Clavien PA (2022) Robotic distal pancreatectomy, a novel standard of care? Benchmark values for surgical outcomes from 16 International Expert Centers. Ann Surg. https://doi.org/10.1097/Sla0000000000005601CrossRefPubMed Müller PC, Breuer E, Nickel F, Zani S Jr, Kauffmann E, De Franco L, Tschuor C, Suno Krohn P, Burgdorf SK, Jonas JP, Oberkofler CE, Petrowsky H, Saint-Marc O, Seelen L, Molenaar IQ, Wellner U, Keck T, Coratti A, Van Dam C, De Wilde R, Koerkamp BG, Valle V, Giulianotti P, Ghabi E, Moskal D, Lavu H, Vrochides D, Martinie J, Yeo C, Sánchez-Velázquez P, Ielpo B, Ajay P, Shah MM, Kooby DA, Gao S, Hao J, He J, Boggi U, Hackert T, Allen P, Borel-Rinkes IHM, Clavien PA (2022) Robotic distal pancreatectomy, a novel standard of care? Benchmark values for surgical outcomes from 16 International Expert Centers. Ann Surg. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1097/​Sla0000000000005​601CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Lof S, Van Der Heijde N, Abuawwad M, Al-Sarireh B, Boggi U, Butturini G, Capretti G, Coratti A, Casadei R, Dhondt M, Esposito A, Ferrari G, Fusai G, Giardino A, Groot Koerkamp B, Hackert T, Kamarajah S, Kauffmann EF, Keck T, Marudanayagam R, Nickel F, Manzoni A, Pessaux P, Pietrabissa A, Rosso E, Salvia R, Soonawalla Z, White S, Zerbi A, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M, Botti M, Cacciaguerra AB, Van Dam C, Van Dieren S, Ferraro D, French J, Frigerio I, Gonzalez CA, Hammoda M, Kulkarni R, Mazzola M, Moraldi L, Muller-Stich BP, Napoli N, Nappo G, De Pastena M, Ramera M, Ricci C, Rompianesi G, Sutcliffe R, Wellner U (2021) Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: multicentre analysis. Br J Surg 108:188–95CrossRefPubMed Lof S, Van Der Heijde N, Abuawwad M, Al-Sarireh B, Boggi U, Butturini G, Capretti G, Coratti A, Casadei R, Dhondt M, Esposito A, Ferrari G, Fusai G, Giardino A, Groot Koerkamp B, Hackert T, Kamarajah S, Kauffmann EF, Keck T, Marudanayagam R, Nickel F, Manzoni A, Pessaux P, Pietrabissa A, Rosso E, Salvia R, Soonawalla Z, White S, Zerbi A, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M, Botti M, Cacciaguerra AB, Van Dam C, Van Dieren S, Ferraro D, French J, Frigerio I, Gonzalez CA, Hammoda M, Kulkarni R, Mazzola M, Moraldi L, Muller-Stich BP, Napoli N, Nappo G, De Pastena M, Ramera M, Ricci C, Rompianesi G, Sutcliffe R, Wellner U (2021) Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: multicentre analysis. Br J Surg 108:188–95CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference De Pastena M, Esposito A, Paiella S, Surci N, Montagnini G, Marchegiani G, Malleo G, Secchettin E, Casetti L, Ricci C, Landoni L, Bovo C, Bassi C, Salvia R (2020) Cost-effectiveness and quality of life analysis of laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy: a propensity score-matched study. Surg Endosc 35:1420–1428CrossRefPubMed De Pastena M, Esposito A, Paiella S, Surci N, Montagnini G, Marchegiani G, Malleo G, Secchettin E, Casetti L, Ricci C, Landoni L, Bovo C, Bassi C, Salvia R (2020) Cost-effectiveness and quality of life analysis of laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy: a propensity score-matched study. Surg Endosc 35:1420–1428CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Lovasik BP, Kron P, Clavien P-A, Petrowsky H, Kooby DA (2019) Pancreatectomy and body mass index: an international evaluation of cumulative postoperative complications using the comprehensive complications index. HPB 21:1761–1772CrossRefPubMed Lovasik BP, Kron P, Clavien P-A, Petrowsky H, Kooby DA (2019) Pancreatectomy and body mass index: an international evaluation of cumulative postoperative complications using the comprehensive complications index. HPB 21:1761–1772CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Ramsey AM, Martin RC (2011) Body mass index and outcomes from pancreatic resection: a review and meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Surg 15:1633–1642CrossRefPubMed Ramsey AM, Martin RC (2011) Body mass index and outcomes from pancreatic resection: a review and meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Surg 15:1633–1642CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Balduzzi A, Van Der Heijde N, Alseidi A, Dokmak S, Ml Kendrick, Polanco PM, Sandford DE, Shrikhande SV, Vollmer CM, Wang SE, Zeh HJ, Hilal MA, Asbun HJ, Besselink MG (2020) Risk factors and outcomes of conversion in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review. Langenbeck Arch Surg 406:597–605CrossRef Balduzzi A, Van Der Heijde N, Alseidi A, Dokmak S, Ml Kendrick, Polanco PM, Sandford DE, Shrikhande SV, Vollmer CM, Wang SE, Zeh HJ, Hilal MA, Asbun HJ, Besselink MG (2020) Risk factors and outcomes of conversion in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review. Langenbeck Arch Surg 406:597–605CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Wang S-E, Daskalaki D, Masrur MA, Patton K, Bianco FM, Giulianotti PC (2016) Impact of obesity on robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 26:551–556CrossRef Wang S-E, Daskalaki D, Masrur MA, Patton K, Bianco FM, Giulianotti PC (2016) Impact of obesity on robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 26:551–556CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Panteleimonitis S, Pickering O, Abbas H, Harper M, Kandala N, Figueiredo N, Qureshi T, Parvaiz A (2018) Robotic rectal cancer surgery in obese patients may lead to better short-term outcomes when compared to laparoscopy: a comparative propensity scored match study. Int J Colorectal Dis 33:1079–1086CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Panteleimonitis S, Pickering O, Abbas H, Harper M, Kandala N, Figueiredo N, Qureshi T, Parvaiz A (2018) Robotic rectal cancer surgery in obese patients may lead to better short-term outcomes when compared to laparoscopy: a comparative propensity scored match study. Int J Colorectal Dis 33:1079–1086CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Cusimano MC, Simpson AN, Dossa F, Liani V, Kaur Y, Acuna SA, Robertson D, Satkunaratnam A, Bernardini MQ, Ferguson SE, Baxter NN (2019) Laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomy in endometrial cancer patients with obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of conversions and complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol 221:410–28CrossRefPubMed Cusimano MC, Simpson AN, Dossa F, Liani V, Kaur Y, Acuna SA, Robertson D, Satkunaratnam A, Bernardini MQ, Ferguson SE, Baxter NN (2019) Laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomy in endometrial cancer patients with obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of conversions and complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol 221:410–28CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Nassour I, Wang SC, Porembka MR, Augustine MM, Yopp AC, Mansour JC, Minter RM, Choti MA, Polanco PM (2017) Conversion of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: predictors and outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol 24:3725–3731CrossRefPubMed Nassour I, Wang SC, Porembka MR, Augustine MM, Yopp AC, Mansour JC, Minter RM, Choti MA, Polanco PM (2017) Conversion of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: predictors and outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol 24:3725–3731CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Chan KS, Wang ZK, Syn N, Goh BKP (2021) Learning curve of laparoscopic and robotic pancreas resections: a systematic review. Surgery 170:194–206CrossRefPubMed Chan KS, Wang ZK, Syn N, Goh BKP (2021) Learning curve of laparoscopic and robotic pancreas resections: a systematic review. Surgery 170:194–206CrossRefPubMed
16.
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 240:205–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral 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 240:205–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Slankamenac K, Graf R, Barkun J, Puhan MA, Clavien P-A (2013) The comprehensive complication index. Ann Surg 258:1–7CrossRef Slankamenac K, Graf R, Barkun J, Puhan MA, Clavien P-A (2013) The comprehensive complication index. Ann Surg 258:1–7CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, Sarr M, Abu Hilal M, Adham M, Allen P, Andersson R, Asbun HJ, Besselink MG, Conlon K, Del Chiaro M, Falconi M, Fernandez-Cruz L, Fernandez-Del Castillo C, Fingerhut A, Friess H, Gouma DJ, Hackert T, Izbicki J, Lillemoe KD, Neoptolemos JP, Olah A, Schulick R, Shrikhande SV, Takada T, Takaori K, Traverso W, Vollmer CR, Wolfgang CI, Yeo CJ, Salvia R, Buchler M (2017) The 2016 update of the International Study Group (Isgps) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery 161:584–91CrossRef Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, Sarr M, Abu Hilal M, Adham M, Allen P, Andersson R, Asbun HJ, Besselink MG, Conlon K, Del Chiaro M, Falconi M, Fernandez-Cruz L, Fernandez-Del Castillo C, Fingerhut A, Friess H, Gouma DJ, Hackert T, Izbicki J, Lillemoe KD, Neoptolemos JP, Olah A, Schulick R, Shrikhande SV, Takada T, Takaori K, Traverso W, Vollmer CR, Wolfgang CI, Yeo CJ, Salvia R, Buchler M (2017) The 2016 update of the International Study Group (Isgps) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery 161:584–91CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Austin PC, Stuart EA (2015) Moving towards best practice when using Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Iptw) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies. Stat Med 34:3661–3679CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Austin PC, Stuart EA (2015) Moving towards best practice when using Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Iptw) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies. Stat Med 34:3661–3679CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference Austin PC (2009) Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Stat Med 28:3083–3107CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Austin PC (2009) Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Stat Med 28:3083–3107CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
go back to reference Björnsson B, Larsson AI, Hjalmarsson C, Gasslander T, Sandström P (2020) Comparison of the duration of hospital stay after laparoscopic or open distal pancreatectomy: randomized controlled trial. Br J Surg 107:1281–1288CrossRefPubMed Björnsson B, Larsson AI, Hjalmarsson C, Gasslander T, Sandström P (2020) Comparison of the duration of hospital stay after laparoscopic or open distal pancreatectomy: randomized controlled trial. Br J Surg 107:1281–1288CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Giulianotti PC, Angelini M (2003) Robotics in general surgery: personal experience in a Large Community Hospital. Arch Surg 130:777–784CrossRef Giulianotti PC, Angelini M (2003) Robotics in general surgery: personal experience in a Large Community Hospital. Arch Surg 130:777–784CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Li P, Zhang H, Chen L, Liu T, Dai M (2023) Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy on perioperative outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Updates Surg 1:7–21CrossRef Li P, Zhang H, Chen L, Liu T, Dai M (2023) Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy on perioperative outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Updates Surg 1:7–21CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Klompmaker S, Van Der Vliet WJ, Thoolen SJ, Ore AS, Verkoulen K, Solis-Velasco M, Canacari EG, Kruskal JB, Khwaja KO, Tseng JF, Callery MP, Kent TS, Moser AJ (2021) Procedure-specific training for robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy. Ann Surg 274:E18–E27CrossRefPubMed Klompmaker S, Van Der Vliet WJ, Thoolen SJ, Ore AS, Verkoulen K, Solis-Velasco M, Canacari EG, Kruskal JB, Khwaja KO, Tseng JF, Callery MP, Kent TS, Moser AJ (2021) Procedure-specific training for robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy. Ann Surg 274:E18–E27CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Daouadi M, Zureikat AH, Zenati MS, Choudry H, Tsung A, Bartlett DI, Hughes SJ, Lee KK, Moser AJ, Zeh HJ (2013) Robot-assisted minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is superior to the laparoscopic technique. Ann Surg 257:128–132CrossRefPubMed Daouadi M, Zureikat AH, Zenati MS, Choudry H, Tsung A, Bartlett DI, Hughes SJ, Lee KK, Moser AJ, Zeh HJ (2013) Robot-assisted minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is superior to the laparoscopic technique. Ann Surg 257:128–132CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Wang YC, Mcpherson K, Marsh T, Gortmaker SI, Brown M (2011) Health and economic burden of the projected obesity trends in the USA and the UK. The Lancet 378:815–825CrossRef Wang YC, Mcpherson K, Marsh T, Gortmaker SI, Brown M (2011) Health and economic burden of the projected obesity trends in the USA and the UK. The Lancet 378:815–825CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Bamgbade OA, Rutter TW, Nafiu OO, Dorje P (2006) Postoperative complications in obese and nonobese patients. World J Surg 31:556–560CrossRef Bamgbade OA, Rutter TW, Nafiu OO, Dorje P (2006) Postoperative complications in obese and nonobese patients. World J Surg 31:556–560CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in obese patients
Authors
Fabio Ausania
Filippo Landi
John B. Martinie
Dionisios Vrochides
Matthew Walsh
Shanaz M. Hossain
Steven White
Viswakumar Prabakaran
Laleh G. Melstrom
Yuman Fong
Giovanni Butturini
Laura Bignotto
Valentina Valle
Yuntao Bing
Dianrong Xiu
Gregorio Di Franco
Francisco Sanchez-Bueno
Nicola de’Angelis
Alexis Laurent
Giuseppe Giuliani
Graziano Pernazza
Alessandro Esposito
Roberto Salvia
Francesca Bazzocchi
Ludovica Esposito
Andrea Pietrabissa
Luigi Pugliese
Riccardo Memeo
Ichiro Uyama
Yuichiro Uchida
José Rios
Andrea Coratti
Luca Morelli
Pier C. Giulianotti
Publication date
15-09-2023
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 11/2023
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-10361-x

Other articles of this Issue 11/2023

Surgical Endoscopy 11/2023 Go to the issue