Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (12)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = robotic distal pancreatectomy

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
30 pages, 2735 KB  
Article
Perioperative Outcomes in Robotic, Laparoscopic, and Open Distal Pancreatectomy: A Network Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression
by Nasser Abdul Halim, Eran Sadot and Ionut Negoi
Cancers 2025, 17(19), 3243; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17193243 - 6 Oct 2025
Viewed by 272
Abstract
Background: Distal pancreatectomy (DP) is a potentially curative procedure for tumors of the pancreatic body and tail. Minimally invasive DP (MIDP), including laparoscopic and robotic techniques, is increasingly being adopted. This study aimed to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of robotic DP (RDP) in [...] Read more.
Background: Distal pancreatectomy (DP) is a potentially curative procedure for tumors of the pancreatic body and tail. Minimally invasive DP (MIDP), including laparoscopic and robotic techniques, is increasingly being adopted. This study aimed to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of robotic DP (RDP) in comparison with laparoscopic and open approaches using a network meta-analysis and meta-regression. Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus for studies comparing at least two surgical approaches. Both Bayesian and frequentist network meta-analyses were performed. Results: Sixty-seven studies involving 18,113 patients met the inclusion criteria. Surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) analysis showed that RDP ranked first in 84.6% of measured parameters. Laparoscopic DP (LDP) demonstrated intermediate performance, whereas open DP (ODP) consistently ranked lowest. Operative time was significantly longer for RDP compared with ODP (MD = +25.93 min, 95% CI 7.68–44.18), while LDP and ODP were comparable. RDP significantly reduced 30-day mortality (OR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.16–0.84) and conversion rates compared with LDP (OR = 0.30, 95% CrI 0.22–0.40). Both minimally invasive approaches (RDP and LDP), compared with open surgery, were associated with reduced blood loss (−304 mL and −273 mL), fewer transfusions (OR 0.25 and 0.30), smaller transfused volumes (−1.98 and −1.86 units), shorter ICU stays (−4.0 and −2.3 days), fewer reinterventions (OR 0.45 and 0.56), and shorter hospital stays (−8.8 and −6.9 days), respectively. Conclusions: Although associated with longer operative time, RDP appears safe and may confer significant advantages over both laparoscopic and open surgery, including reduced 30-day mortality, lower conversion rates, and improved perioperative outcomes, particularly when performed in high-volume, well-equipped centers. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Robotic Surgery for Gastrointestinal (GI) Malignancies)
Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 636 KB  
Article
Outcomes of Robotic Pancreatectomy in the Octogenarian: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study
by Kosei Takagi, Yuichiro Uchida, Tomokazu Fuji, Takeshi Takahara, Kazuya Yasui, Takeyoshi Nishiyama, Ichiro Uyama, Koichi Suda and Toshiyoshi Fujiwara
Cancers 2025, 17(18), 3038; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17183038 - 17 Sep 2025
Viewed by 412
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Due to the increasing incidence of pancreatic and periampullary cancers with advancing age, coupled with the growing evidence supporting minimally invasive pancreatectomy, the demand for such procedures is rising. However, data on the feasibility of robotic pancreatectomy in octogenarian patients remain [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: Due to the increasing incidence of pancreatic and periampullary cancers with advancing age, coupled with the growing evidence supporting minimally invasive pancreatectomy, the demand for such procedures is rising. However, data on the feasibility of robotic pancreatectomy in octogenarian patients remain scant. This study aimed to investigate overall outcomes of robotic pancreatectomy and evaluate its safety and feasibility in octogenarian patients. Methods: A multicenter, retrospective study was conducted, including 380 patients who underwent robotic pancreatectomy at two high-volume centers in Japan from April 2020 to December 2024. Using prospectively collected data, we compared outcomes between younger patients (<80 years) and octogenarian patients (≥80 years). Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the impact of age on postoperative outcomes. Results: Among the 380 patients, with a median age of 72 (interquartile range: 61–77) years, 213 underwent robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD), and 167 underwent robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). Octogenarian patients were found to have more comorbidities and a higher incidence of malignant diseases. Octogenarians experienced significantly longer hospital stays post-RPD (22 [octogenarian; n = 36] vs. 14 [younger; n = 177] days, p < 0.001) and post-RDP (14 [n = 23] vs. 10.5 [n = 144] days, p = 0.02), yet their perioperative outcomes were comparable. Multivariable analyses indicated that age (≥80 years) was not a significant risk factor for major complications following robotic pancreatectomy (odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.59–2.84; p = 0.479). Conclusions: This multicenter study conducted at high-volume centers suggests that robotic pancreatectomy can be safely performed in carefully selected octogenarian patients. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Methods and Technologies Development)
Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 2702 KB  
Article
Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy as the Standard of Care in the US: Are We There Yet?
by Laleh Foroutani, Andrew Gonzalez, Jaeyun Jane Wang, Bahaa I. Aburayya, Amir Ashraf Ganjouei, Jean Feng, Lucas Willian Thornblade, Kenzo Hirose, Ajay V. Maker, Eric Nakakura, Carlos Uriel Corvera, Adnan Alseidi and Mohamed A. Adam
Cancers 2025, 17(18), 3015; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17183015 - 16 Sep 2025
Viewed by 458
Abstract
Introduction: While there is an increasing shift towards minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP), little is known about how utilization of MIDP vs. open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) has evolved over time. We aimed to determine competing temporal trends in use and outcomes of MIDP [...] Read more.
Introduction: While there is an increasing shift towards minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP), little is known about how utilization of MIDP vs. open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) has evolved over time. We aimed to determine competing temporal trends in use and outcomes of MIDP (laparoscopic and robotic) over time and to determine if a threshold of effectiveness has been reached. Methods: Adults undergoing MIDP and ODP were identified from the National Cancer Database (2010–2021) and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2014–2022). Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to address baseline differences between groups before comparing outcomes. Joinpoint regression analysis (JRA) was employed to assess adjusted trends in adoption and outcomes. We calculated Annual Percentage Change (APC) and Average Annual Percentage Change (AAPC) to quantify yearly adoption rates and their trends, respectively. Results: Among 21,966 patients in the NCDB cohort, 49.5% underwent MIDP, including 33.7% laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) and 15.8% robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP), while 50.5% underwent ODP. ODP declined from 74.1% of cases (2010) to 41.1% (2021), with an AAPC of −4.9%. MIDP increased significantly throughout the study from 25.9% of cases (2010) to 58.9% (2021), with an AAPC of 6.3%. Among MIDP subgroups, there was an initial increase in LDP until 2016, after which its rate of utilization stagnated with an AAPC of 0.7% (p > 0.05). In contrast, RDP demonstrated steady growth with an AAPC of about 15% (p < 0.05). A consistent and significant decline in clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula rates occurred across all surgical approaches, with the most pronounced improvement observed in the robotic approach. MIDP approaches had significantly shorter hospital stays and lower mortality rates; however, RDP cases were associated with longer operative times compared to LDP and ODP. Conclusions: Over the past decade, the use of MIDP increased while ODP decreased. This increase was initially driven by greater use of LDP, which plateaued after 2016, and was further driven by the increased use of the robotic approach. Specifically, RDP demonstrated consistent growth, while LDP showed a decline around 2016. These findings highlight changing practice patterns, accompanied by improvements across all surgical approaches. This may provide insights for clinical training and resource allocation. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Clinical Surgery for Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary (HPB) Cancer)
Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 1284 KB  
Review
The Blood Supply of the Human Pancreas: Anatomical and Surgical Considerations
by George Triantafyllou, Orestis Lyros, Nikolaos Arkadopoulos, Panagiotis Kokoropoulos, Fotis Demetriou, Alexandros Samolis, Łukasz Olewnik, Ingrid C. Landfald and Maria Piagkou
J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14(16), 5625; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14165625 - 8 Aug 2025
Viewed by 934
Abstract
The pancreas exhibits a uniquely intricate vascular architecture characterized by frequent and clinically significant morphological variations. These variations—impacting both arterial supply and venous drainage—are critical determinants in surgical planning, radiologic interpretation, and interventional outcomes. This comprehensive review examines the full spectrum of pancreatic [...] Read more.
The pancreas exhibits a uniquely intricate vascular architecture characterized by frequent and clinically significant morphological variations. These variations—impacting both arterial supply and venous drainage—are critical determinants in surgical planning, radiologic interpretation, and interventional outcomes. This comprehensive review examines the full spectrum of pancreatic vascular anatomy, with particular emphasis on embryological development, imaging manifestations, and surgical relevance. Key arterial structures, including the superior and inferior pancreaticoduodenal arteries (SPDAs and IPDAs) and the dorsal pancreatic artery (DPA)—are explored in detail alongside accessory branches. On the venous side, focus is placed on the gastrocolic trunk (GCT) of Henle, the uncinate and centro-inferior pancreatic veins, and the dorsal pancreatic vein (DPV). The review highlights that arterial aberrations, such as a DPA originating from the superior mesenteric artery (SMA), or duplicated patterns of the IPDA, as well as venous anomalies such as variant drainage of the GCT or the centro-inferior pancreatic vein, have substantial implications during pancreaticoduodenectomy, distal pancreatectomy, and transplantation procedures. With advances in multidetector computed tomography (MDCT), magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), and three-dimensional (3D) modeling, high-risk vascular variants can now be accurately mapped preoperatively, facilitating safer and more effective minimally invasive and robotic-assisted surgeries. In conclusion, the recognition and understanding of pancreatic vascular variations are imperative for optimal surgical and interventional management. This review underscores the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration among surgeons, radiologists, and anatomists, which will allow them to integrate detailed anatomical knowledge into clinical workflows, ultimately improving patient outcomes in pancreatic procedures. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Gastroenterology & Hepatopancreatobiliary Medicine)
Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 633 KB  
Article
Robotic Versus Hand-Assisted Distal Pancreatectomy: A Comparative Single Center Retrospective Study
by Nabih Essami, Esther Kazlow, Eitan Dines, Aasem Abu Shtaya, Wisam Assaf, Riad Haddad and Ahmad Mahamid
J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14(14), 4919; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14144919 - 11 Jul 2025
Viewed by 516
Abstract
Background: While there is an abundance of comparative studies on open, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted distal pancreatectomies (RDPs) available in the literature, direct comparisons between RDP and hand-assisted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (HALDP) are limited. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy [...] Read more.
Background: While there is an abundance of comparative studies on open, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted distal pancreatectomies (RDPs) available in the literature, direct comparisons between RDP and hand-assisted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (HALDP) are limited. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of RDPs in comparison to HALDPs in the treatment of pancreatic lesions. Methods: This study reviewed 97 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy at Carmel Medical Center between 2008 and 2024. After excluding 40 patients (24 open and 16 pure laparoscopic resections), the final cohort comprised 57 patients: 20 RDPs and 37 HALDPs. The primary outcomes included peri-operative parameters, while secondary outcomes encompassed 90-day morbidity and mortality. Results: RDPs led to significantly longer operative times (3.9 vs. 2.5 h, p < 0.001) but resulted in shorter hospital stays (4.7 vs. 5.8 days, p = 0.02) and a higher number of harvested lymph nodes (11 vs. 5.4, p = 0.01). While clinically significant pancreatic fistula rates were numerically higher in the RDP group (35% vs. 16.2%, p = 0.18), this difference was not statistically significant. Overall, complication rates were comparable (55% vs. 43.2%, p = 0.39). Severe morbidity (Clavien–Dindo ≥ IIIa) was absent in the RDP group compared to 8% in the HALDP group (p = 0.04). No 90-day mortality was observed in either group. Conclusions: This study indicates that although RDP involves longer operative times, it may provide certain advantages for patients, such as shorter hospital stays, better lymph node retrieval, and a notable decrease in postoperative morbidity when compared to HALDP. Larger prospective studies are needed to validate these results and to determine the most effective surgical approach for distal pancreatectomy. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 474 KB  
Article
Surgical and Oncological Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Left Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Cancer: Robotic vs. Laparoscopic Approach
by Matteo De Pastena, Gabriella Lionetto, Salvatore Paiella, Martina Maruccio, Federico Faustini, Elisa Venturini, Antonio Pea, Fabio Casciani, Giuseppe Malleo and Alessandro Esposito
Curr. Oncol. 2025, 32(7), 376; https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol32070376 - 28 Jun 2025
Viewed by 770
Abstract
Objective: This study compares the surgical and oncological outcomes of minimally invasive robotic (RLP) and laparoscopic (LLP) left pancreatectomy in pancreatic cancer (PC) patients. Methods: Data from patients who underwent minimally invasive left pancreatectomy between 2013 and 2023 were analyzed. Two groups were [...] Read more.
Objective: This study compares the surgical and oncological outcomes of minimally invasive robotic (RLP) and laparoscopic (LLP) left pancreatectomy in pancreatic cancer (PC) patients. Methods: Data from patients who underwent minimally invasive left pancreatectomy between 2013 and 2023 were analyzed. Two groups were identified: RLP and LLP. Perioperative outcomes were compared, including operative time, blood loss, conversion rate, and postoperative complications. Oncological outcomes included margin status, lymph node retrieval, lymph node status, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Results: Fifty-four patients were divided into the LLP (n = 39) and RLP (n = 15) groups. The median operative time was shorter for LLP than RLP [260 min vs. 366 min, p = 0.007]. Blood loss and conversion rates were comparable (p > 0.05). In the LLP group, significantly more lymph nodes were harvested (29 vs. 19, p = 0.05), and a higher percentage of positive lymph nodes was noted (72% vs. 40%, p = 0.033). No significant difference was found in the R0 resection status (82% vs. 73%, p = 0.358). After a median follow-up of 26 months, OS (23 months vs. 34 months, p = 0.812) and DFS (17 months vs. 16 months, p = 0.635) were similar. Conclusion: RLP provides outcomes identical to LLP in treating body–tail pancreatic cancer, with further studies needed to confirm its long-term oncological efficacy. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1306 KB  
Article
Serosal Patching with Glubran®2 on the Pancreatic Stump for Reducing Postoperative Pancreatic Fistulae After Robot-Assisted Distal Pancreatectomy: A Single-Center Retrospective Study
by Ahmad Mahamid, Eden Gerszman, Esther Kazlow, Aasem Abu Shtaya, Natalia Goldberg, Dvir Froylich and Riad Haddad
Cancers 2025, 17(3), 502; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17030502 - 3 Feb 2025
Viewed by 935
Abstract
Background: Postoperative pancreatic fistulae (POPFs) are a significant cause of morbidity following left pancreatectomy. We hypothesized that incorporating serosal patching with the application of a synthetic sealant, a modified cyanoacrylate (Glubran®2), to the pancreatic stump, would decrease the incidence rate of [...] Read more.
Background: Postoperative pancreatic fistulae (POPFs) are a significant cause of morbidity following left pancreatectomy. We hypothesized that incorporating serosal patching with the application of a synthetic sealant, a modified cyanoacrylate (Glubran®2), to the pancreatic stump, would decrease the incidence rate of clinically significant POPFs. Methods: This is a retrospective study of consecutive patients who underwent robot-assisted left pancreatectomy. The primary outcome was clinically significant POPFs within 90 days of surgery. Secondary outcomes included the incidence rate of POPFs (all the grades), 90-day morbidity, and 90-day mortality. Results: We compared outcomes between Glubran®2 sealant with serosal patching (GSP, n = 6) and Glubran®2 sealant without serosal patching (GNSP, n = 12) groups. The GSP group had significantly lower incidence rates of clinically significant POPFs (grades B/C) (p = 0.034) and overall POPFs (all the grades) (p = 0.046). No significant differences in 90-day postoperative morbidity were observed between the two groups (p = 0.56), and no 90-day mortality occurred in either group. Conclusions: Incorporating serosal patching along with Glubran®2 sealant in the management of the pancreatic stump during left pancreatectomy demonstrates promising results in reducing the incidence rate of clinically significant POPFs. This finding highlights the need for further research with larger sample sizes in order to confirm the observed outcomes and explore the long-term implications for postoperative complications and recovery in patients undergoing this procedure during pancreatic surgery. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Robotic Surgery for Gastrointestinal (GI) Malignancies)
Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 681 KB  
Systematic Review
Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: What Is the Best Surgical Option?
by Renato Patrone, Federico Maria Mongardini, Alessandra Conzo, Chiara Cacciatore, Giovanni Cozzolino, Antonio Catauro, Eduardo Lanza, Francesco Izzo, Andrea Belli, Raffaele Palaia, Luigi Flagiello, Ferdinando De Vita, Ludovico Docimo and Giovanni Conzo
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(10), 3015; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13103015 - 20 May 2024
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 3017
Abstract
Background: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) represent a rare subset of pancreatic cancer. Functional tumors cause hormonal changes and clinical syndromes, while non-functional ones are often diagnosed late. Surgical management needs multidisciplinary planning, involving enucleation, distal pancreatectomy with or without spleen preservation, central [...] Read more.
Background: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) represent a rare subset of pancreatic cancer. Functional tumors cause hormonal changes and clinical syndromes, while non-functional ones are often diagnosed late. Surgical management needs multidisciplinary planning, involving enucleation, distal pancreatectomy with or without spleen preservation, central pancreatectomy, pancreaticoduodenectomy or total pancreatectomy. Minimally invasive approaches have increased in the last decade compared to the open technique. The aim of this study was to analyze the current diagnostic and surgical trends for pNETs, to identify better interventions and their outcomes. Methods: The study adhered to the PRISMA guidelines, conducting a systematic review of the literature from May 2008 to March 2022 across multiple databases. Several combinations of keywords were used (“NET”, “pancreatic”, “surgery”, “laparoscopic”, “minimally invasive”, “robotic”, “enucleation”, “parenchyma sparing”) and relevant article references were manually checked. The manuscript quality was evaluated. Results: The study screened 3867 manuscripts and twelve studies were selected, primarily from Italy, the United States, and China. A total of 7767 surgically treated patients were collected from 160 included centers. The mean age was 56.3 y.o. Enucleation (EN) and distal pancreatectomy (DP) were the most commonly performed surgeries and represented 43.4% and 38.6% of the total interventions, respectively. Pancreatic fistulae, postoperative bleeding, re-operation, and follow-up were recorded and analyzed. Conclusions: Enucleation shows better postoperative outcomes and lower mortality rates compared to pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or distal pancreatectomy (DP), despite the similar risks of postoperative pancreatic fistulae (POPF). DP is preferred over enucleation for the pancreas body–tail, while laparoscopic enucleation is better for head pNETs. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 514 KB  
Article
Short-Term Outcomes of Conventional Laparoscopic versus Robot-Assisted Distal Pancreatectomy for Malignancy: Evidence from US National Inpatient Sample, 2005–2018
by Jyun-Ming Huang, Sheng-Hsien Chen and Te-Hung Chen
Cancers 2024, 16(5), 1003; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16051003 - 29 Feb 2024
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 1520
Abstract
Background: The primary treatment for pancreatic cancer is surgical resection, and laparoscopic resection offers benefits over open surgery. This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted vs. conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. Methods: Data of adults ≥ 20 years old with pancreatic [...] Read more.
Background: The primary treatment for pancreatic cancer is surgical resection, and laparoscopic resection offers benefits over open surgery. This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted vs. conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. Methods: Data of adults ≥ 20 years old with pancreatic cancer who underwent conventional laparoscopic or robot-assisted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy were extracted from the United States (US) Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2005–2018 database. Comorbidities and complications were identified through the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes. Short-term outcomes were compared using logistic regression and included length of hospital stay (LOS), perioperative complications, in-hospital mortality, unfavorable discharge, and total hospital costs. Results: A total of 886 patients were included; 27% received robot-assisted, and 73% received conventional laparoscopic surgery. The mean age of all patients was 65.3 years, and 52% were females. Multivariable analysis revealed that robot-assisted surgery was associated with a significantly reduced risk of perioperative complications (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.45–0.83) compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery. Specifically, robot-assisted surgery was associated with a significantly decreased risk of VTE (aOR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.14–0.83) and postoperative blood transfusion (aOR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.23–0.61). Robot-assisted surgery was associated with a significantly shorter LOS (0.76 days shorter, 95% CI: −1.43–−0.09) but greater total hospital costs (18,284 USD greater, 95% CI: 4369.03–32,200.70) than conventional laparoscopic surgery. Conclusions: Despite the higher costs, robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy is associated with decreased risk of complications and shorter hospital stays than conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Cancer Therapy)
Show Figures

Figure 1

9 pages, 269 KB  
Article
Robotic Distal Pancreatectomy Yields Superior Outcomes Compared to Laparoscopic Technique: A Single Surgeon Experience of 123 Consecutive Cases
by Hao Ding, Michal Kawka, Tamara M. H. Gall, Chris Wadsworth, Nagy Habib, David Nicol, David Cunningham and Long R. Jiao
Cancers 2023, 15(22), 5492; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15225492 - 20 Nov 2023
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2985
Abstract
Technical limitations of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), in comparison to robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP), may translate to high conversion rates and morbidity. LDP and RDP procedures performed between December 2008 and January 2023 in our tertiary referral hepatobiliary and pancreatic centres were analysed [...] Read more.
Technical limitations of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), in comparison to robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP), may translate to high conversion rates and morbidity. LDP and RDP procedures performed between December 2008 and January 2023 in our tertiary referral hepatobiliary and pancreatic centres were analysed and compared with regard to short-term outcomes. A total of 62 consecutive LDP cases and 61 RDP cases were performed. There was more conversion to open surgeries in the laparoscopic group compared with the robotic group (21.0% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.001). The LDP group also had a higher rate of postoperative complications (43.5% vs. 23.0%, p = 0.005). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of major complication or pancreatic fistular after operations (p = 0.20 and p = 0.71, respectively). For planned spleen-preserving operations, the RDP group had a shorter mean operative time (147 min vs. 194 min, p = 0.015) and a reduced total length of hospital stay compared with the LDP group (4 days vs. 7 days, p = 0.0002). The failure rate for spleen preservation was 0% in RDP and 20% (n = 5/25) in the LDP group (p = 0.009). RDP offered a better method for splenic preservation with Kimura’s technique compared with LDP to avoid the risk of splenic infarction and gastric varices related to ligation and division of splenic pedicles. RDP should be the standard operation for the resection of pancreatic tumours at the body and tail of the pancreas without involving the celiac axis or common hepatic artery. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Updates on Surgical Treatment of Pancreaticobiliary Cancers)
11 pages, 1552 KB  
Review
Robotic versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Spleen-Preserving Distal Pancreatectomies: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
by Gianluca Rompianesi, Roberto Montalti, Luisa Ambrosio and Roberto Ivan Troisi
J. Pers. Med. 2021, 11(6), 552; https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11060552 - 13 Jun 2021
Cited by 25 | Viewed by 4002
Abstract
Background: When oncologically feasible, avoiding unnecessary splenectomies prevents patients who are undergoing distal pancreatectomy (DP) from facing significant thromboembolic and infective risks. Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Web Of Science identified 11 studies reporting outcomes of 323 patients undergoing intended [...] Read more.
Background: When oncologically feasible, avoiding unnecessary splenectomies prevents patients who are undergoing distal pancreatectomy (DP) from facing significant thromboembolic and infective risks. Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Web Of Science identified 11 studies reporting outcomes of 323 patients undergoing intended spleen-preserving minimally invasive robotic DP (SP-RADP) and 362 laparoscopic DP (SP-LADP) in order to compare the spleen preservation rates of the two techniques. The risk of bias was evaluated according to the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Results: SP-RADP showed superior results over the laparoscopic approach, with an inferior spleen preservation failure risk difference (RD) of 0.24 (95% CI 0.15, 0.33), reduced open conversion rate (RD of −0.05 (95% CI −0.09, −0.01)), reduced blood loss (mean difference of −138 mL (95% CI −205, −71)), and mean difference in hospital length of stay of −1.5 days (95% CI −2.8, −0.2), with similar operative time, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (ISGPS grade B/C), and Clavien–Dindo grade ≥3 postoperative complications. Conclusion: Both SP-RADP and SP-LADP proved to be safe and effective procedures, with minimal perioperative mortality and low postoperative morbidity. The robotic approach proved to be superior to the laparoscopic approach in terms of spleen preservation rate, intraoperative blood loss, and hospital length of stay. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Update on Robotic Gastrointestinal Surgery)
Show Figures

Figure 1

9 pages, 869 KB  
Article
Implementation of Robotic Assistance in Pancreatic Surgery: Experiences from the First 101 Consecutive Cases
by Lea Timmermann, Matthias Biebl, Moritz Schmelzle, Marcus Bahra, Thomas Malinka and Johann Pratschke
J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10(2), 229; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10020229 - 11 Jan 2021
Cited by 13 | Viewed by 3027
Abstract
Robotic assisted minimally invasive surgery has been implemented to overcome typical limitations of conventional laparoscopy such as lack of angulation, especially during creation of biliary and pancreatic anastomoses. With this retrospective analysis, we provide our experience with the first 101 consecutive robotic pancreatic [...] Read more.
Robotic assisted minimally invasive surgery has been implemented to overcome typical limitations of conventional laparoscopy such as lack of angulation, especially during creation of biliary and pancreatic anastomoses. With this retrospective analysis, we provide our experience with the first 101 consecutive robotic pancreatic resection performed at our center. Distal pancreatectomies (RDP, N = 44), total pancreatectomies (RTP, N = 3) and pancreaticoduodenectomies (RPD, N = 54) were included. Malignancy was found in 45.5% (RDP), 66.7% (RTP) and 61% (RPD). Procedure times decreased from the first to the second half of the cohort for RDP (218 min vs. 128 min, p = 0.02) and RPD (378 min vs. 271 min, p < 0.001). Overall complication rate was 63%, 33% and 66% for RPD, RPT and RDP, respectively. Reintervention and reoperation rates were 41% and 17% (RPD), 33% and 0% (RTP) and 50% and 11.4% (RPD), respectively. The thirty-day mortality rate was 5.6% for RPD and nil for RTP and RDP. Overall complication rate remained stable throughout the study period. In this series, implementation of robotic pancreas surgery was safe and feasible. Final evaluation of the anastomoses through the median retrieval incision compensated for the lack of haptic feedback during reconstruction and allowed for secure minimally invasive resection and reconstruction. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in Minimally Invasive Surgery)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop