Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 9/2019

01-09-2019

The learning curve for a surgeon in robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a retrospective study in a high-volume pancreatic center

Authors: Tao Zhang, Zhi-Ming Zhao, Yuan-Xing Gao, Wan Yee Lau, Rong Liu

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 9/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is one of the most technically difficult abdominal operations. Recent advances have allowed surgeons to attempt PD using minimally invasive surgery techniques. This retrospective study aimed to analyze the learning curve of a single surgeon who had carried out his first 100 robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) in a high-volume pancreatic center.

Methods

The data on consecutive patients who underwent RPD for malignant or benign pathologies were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. The data included the demographic data, operative time, estimated blood loss, postoperative length of hospital stay, morbidity rate, mortality rate, and final pathological results. The cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis was used to identify the inflexion points which corresponded to the learning curve.

Results

Between 2012 and 2016, 100 patients underwent RPD by a single surgeon. From the CUSUM operation time (CUSUM OT) learning curve, two distinct phases of the learning process were identified (early 40 patients and late 60 patients). The operation time (mean, 418 min vs. 317 min), hospital stay (mean, 22 days vs. 15 days), and estimated blood loss (mean, 227 ml vs. 134 ml) were significantly lower after the first 40 patients (P < 0.05). The pancreatic fistula, postoperative hemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying, and reoperation rates also decreased in the late 60 patients group (P < 0.05). Non-significant reductions were observed in the incidences of major (Clavien–Dindo Grade II or higher) morbidity, postoperative death, bile leakage, gastric fistula, wound infection, and open conversion.

Conclusions

RPD was technically feasible and safe in selected patients. The learning curve was completed after 40 RPD. Further studies are required to confirm the long-term oncological outcomes of RPD.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Gagner M, Pomp A (1994) Laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc 8:408–410CrossRefPubMed Gagner M, Pomp A (1994) Laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc 8:408–410CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Bencini L, Annecchiarico M, Farsi M, Bartonlini I, Mirasolo V, Guerra F, Coratti A (2015) Minimally invasive surgical approach to pancreatic malignancies. World J Gastrointest Oncol 7:411–421CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bencini L, Annecchiarico M, Farsi M, Bartonlini I, Mirasolo V, Guerra F, Coratti A (2015) Minimally invasive surgical approach to pancreatic malignancies. World J Gastrointest Oncol 7:411–421CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Boggi U, Signori S, De Lio N, Perrone VG, Vistoli F, Belluomini M, Cappelli C, Amorese G, Mosca F (2013) Feasibility of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 100:917–925CrossRefPubMed Boggi U, Signori S, De Lio N, Perrone VG, Vistoli F, Belluomini M, Cappelli C, Amorese G, Mosca F (2013) Feasibility of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 100:917–925CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Damoli I, Butturini G, Ramera M, Paiella S, Marchegiani G, Bassi C (2015) Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery—a review. Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne 10:141–149PubMedPubMedCentral Damoli I, Butturini G, Ramera M, Paiella S, Marchegiani G, Bassi C (2015) Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery—a review. Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne 10:141–149PubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Sanchez-Cabus S, Pittau G, Gelli M, Memeo R, Schwarz L, Sa Cunha A (2015) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: hybrid surgical technique. J Am Coll Surg 220:e7–e11CrossRefPubMed Sanchez-Cabus S, Pittau G, Gelli M, Memeo R, Schwarz L, Sa Cunha A (2015) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: hybrid surgical technique. J Am Coll Surg 220:e7–e11CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Stafford AT, Walsh RM (2015) Robotic surgery of the pancreas: the current state of the art. J Surg Oncol 112:289–294CrossRefPubMed Stafford AT, Walsh RM (2015) Robotic surgery of the pancreas: the current state of the art. J Surg Oncol 112:289–294CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Baker EH, Ross SW, Seshadri R, Swan RZ, Iannitti DA, Vrochides D, Martinie JB (2015) Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: role in 2014 and beyond. J Gastrointest Oncol 6:396–405PubMedPubMedCentral Baker EH, Ross SW, Seshadri R, Swan RZ, Iannitti DA, Vrochides D, Martinie JB (2015) Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: role in 2014 and beyond. J Gastrointest Oncol 6:396–405PubMedPubMedCentral
9.
go back to reference Memeo R, Sangiuolo F, de Blasi V, Tzedakis S, Mutter D, Marescaux J, Pessaux P (2016) Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy: state of the art. J Visc Surg 153:353–359CrossRefPubMed Memeo R, Sangiuolo F, de Blasi V, Tzedakis S, Mutter D, Marescaux J, Pessaux P (2016) Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy: state of the art. J Visc Surg 153:353–359CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Aselmann H, Egberts JH, Hinz S, Junemann KP, Becker T (2016) Robot-assisted pylorus-preserving partial pancreaticoduodenectomy (Kausch-Whipple Procedure). Zentralbl Chir 141:139–141CrossRefPubMed Aselmann H, Egberts JH, Hinz S, Junemann KP, Becker T (2016) Robot-assisted pylorus-preserving partial pancreaticoduodenectomy (Kausch-Whipple Procedure). Zentralbl Chir 141:139–141CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Lei P, Wei B, Guo W, Wei H (2014) Minimally invasive surgical approach compared with open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis on the feasibility and safety. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutaneous Tech 24:296–305CrossRef Lei P, Wei B, Guo W, Wei H (2014) Minimally invasive surgical approach compared with open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis on the feasibility and safety. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutaneous Tech 24:296–305CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Zhang H, Wu X, Zhu F, Shen M, Tian R, Shi C, Wang X, Xiao G, Guo X, Wang M, Qin R (2016) Systematic review and meta-analysis of minimally invasive versus open approach for pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc 12:5173–5184CrossRef Zhang H, Wu X, Zhu F, Shen M, Tian R, Shi C, Wang X, Xiao G, Guo X, Wang M, Qin R (2016) Systematic review and meta-analysis of minimally invasive versus open approach for pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc 12:5173–5184CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Wang M, Meng L, Cai Y, Li Y, Wang X, Zhang Z, Peng B (2016) Learning curve for laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a CUSUM analysis. J Gastrointest Surg 20:924–935CrossRefPubMed Wang M, Meng L, Cai Y, Li Y, Wang X, Zhang Z, Peng B (2016) Learning curve for laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a CUSUM analysis. J Gastrointest Surg 20:924–935CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Napoli N, Kauffmann EF, Palmeri M, Miccoli M, Costa F, Vistoli F, Amorese G, Boggi U (2016) The learning curve in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Dig Surg 33:299–307CrossRefPubMed Napoli N, Kauffmann EF, Palmeri M, Miccoli M, Costa F, Vistoli F, Amorese G, Boggi U (2016) The learning curve in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Dig Surg 33:299–307CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Coe TM, Fong ZV, Wilson SE, Talamini MA, Lillemoe KD, Chang DC (2015) Outcomes improvement is not continuous along the learning curve for pancreaticoduodenectomy at the hospital level. J Gastrointest Surg 19:2132–2137CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Coe TM, Fong ZV, Wilson SE, Talamini MA, Lillemoe KD, Chang DC (2015) Outcomes improvement is not continuous along the learning curve for pancreaticoduodenectomy at the hospital level. J Gastrointest Surg 19:2132–2137CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EV, Stukel TA, Lucas FL, Batista I, Welch HG, Wennberg DE (2002) Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med 346(15):1128–1137CrossRefPubMed Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EV, Stukel TA, Lucas FL, Batista I, Welch HG, Wennberg DE (2002) Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med 346(15):1128–1137CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Liu R, Zhang T, Zhao Z-M, Tan XL, Zhao GD, Zhang X, Xu Y (2016) The surgical outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary neoplasms: a comparative study of a single center. Surg Endosc 31:2380–2386CrossRefPubMed Liu R, Zhang T, Zhao Z-M, Tan XL, Zhao GD, Zhang X, Xu Y (2016) The surgical outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary neoplasms: a comparative study of a single center. Surg Endosc 31:2380–2386CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Buchs NC, Addeo P, Bianco FM, Ayloo S, Benedetti E, Giulianotti PC (2011) Robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. World J Surg 35:2739–2746CrossRefPubMed Buchs NC, Addeo P, Bianco FM, Ayloo S, Benedetti E, Giulianotti PC (2011) Robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. World J Surg 35:2739–2746CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Chalikonda S, Aguilar-Saavedra JR, Walsh RM (2012) Laparoscopic robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy: a case-matched comparison with open resection. Surg Endosc 26:2397–2402CrossRefPubMed Chalikonda S, Aguilar-Saavedra JR, Walsh RM (2012) Laparoscopic robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy: a case-matched comparison with open resection. Surg Endosc 26:2397–2402CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Lai EC, Yang GP, Tang CN (2012) Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy—a comparative study. Int J Surg 10:475–479CrossRefPubMed Lai EC, Yang GP, Tang CN (2012) Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy—a comparative study. Int J Surg 10:475–479CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Correa-Gallego C, Dinkelspiel HE, Sulimanoff I, Fisher S, Viñuela EF, Kingham TP, Fong Y, DeMatteo RP, D’Angelica MI, Jarnagin WR, Allen PJ (2014) Minimally-invasive vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Surg 218:129–139CrossRefPubMed Correa-Gallego C, Dinkelspiel HE, Sulimanoff I, Fisher S, Viñuela EF, Kingham TP, Fong Y, DeMatteo RP, D’Angelica MI, Jarnagin WR, Allen PJ (2014) Minimally-invasive vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Surg 218:129–139CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Liao CH, Wu YT, Liu YY, Wang SY, Kang SC, Yeh CN, Yeh TS (2016) Systemic review of the feasibility and advantage of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy. World J Surg 40:1218–1225CrossRefPubMed Liao CH, Wu YT, Liu YY, Wang SY, Kang SC, Yeh CN, Yeh TS (2016) Systemic review of the feasibility and advantage of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy. World J Surg 40:1218–1225CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Rodriguez-Sanjuan JC, Gomez-Ruiz M, Trugeda-Carrera S, Manuel-Palazuelos C, López-Useros A, Gómez-Fleitas M (2016) Laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic digestive surgery: present and future directions. World J Gastroenterol 22:1975–2004CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Rodriguez-Sanjuan JC, Gomez-Ruiz M, Trugeda-Carrera S, Manuel-Palazuelos C, López-Useros A, Gómez-Fleitas M (2016) Laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic digestive surgery: present and future directions. World J Gastroenterol 22:1975–2004CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
go back to reference Kim KS, Kwon J, Kim K, Chie EK (2016) Impact of resection margin distance on survival of pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Res Treat 49:824–833CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kim KS, Kwon J, Kim K, Chie EK (2016) Impact of resection margin distance on survival of pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Res Treat 49:824–833CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
go back to reference Howard TJ, Krug JE, Yu J, Zyromski NJ, Schmidt CM, Jacobson LE, Madura JA, Wiebke EA, Lillemoe KD (2006) A margin-negative R0 resection accomplished with minimal postoperative complications is the surgeon’s contribution to long-term survival in pancreatic cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 10:1338–1345CrossRefPubMed Howard TJ, Krug JE, Yu J, Zyromski NJ, Schmidt CM, Jacobson LE, Madura JA, Wiebke EA, Lillemoe KD (2006) A margin-negative R0 resection accomplished with minimal postoperative complications is the surgeon’s contribution to long-term survival in pancreatic cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 10:1338–1345CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference van Rijssen LB, Narwade P, van Huijgevoort NC, Tseng DS, van Santvoort HC, Molenaar IQ, van Laarhoven HW, van Eijck CH, Busch OR, Besselink MG (2016) Prognostic value of lymph node metastases detected during surgical exploration for pancreatic or periampullary cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. HPB (Oxford) 18:559–566CrossRef van Rijssen LB, Narwade P, van Huijgevoort NC, Tseng DS, van Santvoort HC, Molenaar IQ, van Laarhoven HW, van Eijck CH, Busch OR, Besselink MG (2016) Prognostic value of lymph node metastases detected during surgical exploration for pancreatic or periampullary cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. HPB (Oxford) 18:559–566CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Riediger H, Kulemann B, Wittel U, Adam U, Sick O, Neeff H, Höppner J, Hopt UT, Makowiec F (2016) Prognostic role of log odds of lymph nodes after resection of pancreatic head cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 10:1707–1715CrossRef Riediger H, Kulemann B, Wittel U, Adam U, Sick O, Neeff H, Höppner J, Hopt UT, Makowiec F (2016) Prognostic role of log odds of lymph nodes after resection of pancreatic head cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 10:1707–1715CrossRef
Metadata
Title
The learning curve for a surgeon in robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a retrospective study in a high-volume pancreatic center
Authors
Tao Zhang
Zhi-Ming Zhao
Yuan-Xing Gao
Wan Yee Lau
Rong Liu
Publication date
01-09-2019
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 9/2019
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6595-0

Other articles of this Issue 9/2019

Surgical Endoscopy 9/2019 Go to the issue