Search

Objective: We aimed to describe our experience and the learning curve of 450 cases of robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and optimize the surgical process so that our findings can be useful for surgeons starting to perform RPD., Summary Background Data: Robotic surgical systems were first introduced 20 years ago. Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a challenging surgery because of its technical difficulty. RPD may overcome some of these difficulties., Methods: The medical records of 450 patients who underwent RPD between May 2010 and December 2018 at the Shanghai Ruijin Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Operative times and estimated blood loss (EBL) were analyzed and the learning curve was determined. A cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis was used to identify the inflexion points. Other postoperative outcomes, postoperative complications, and long-term follow-up were also analyzed., Results: Operative time improved graduallyovertimefrom405.4 ± 112.9 minutes (case 1-50) to 273.6 ± 70 minutes (case 301-350) (P < 0.001). EBL improved from 410 ± 563.5 mL (case 1-50) to 149.0 ± 103.3 mL (case 351-400) (P< 0.001). According to the CUSUM curve, there were 3 phases in the RPD learning curve. The inflexion points were around cases 100 and 250. The incidence of pancreatic leak in the last 350 cases was significantly lower than that in the first 100 cases (30.0% vs 15.1%, P = 0.003)., Conclusions: RPD is safe and feasible for selected patients. Operative and oncologic outcomes were much improved after experience of 250 cases. Our optimization of the surgical process may have also contributed to this. Future prospective and randomized studies are needed to confirm our results., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2019 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has been reported to be safe and feasible. As a new technique, RPD has a learning curve similar to that of other types of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery such as laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. To our knowledge, no reports exist on the outcomes of open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) and RPD after the learning curve., Objective: To analyze and evaluate the actual advantages of RPD., Design, Setting, and Participants: Between May 2010 and December 2018, 450 patients underwent RPD in the Shanghai Ruijin Hospital affiliated with Shanghai Jiaotong University in Shanghai, China, a high-volume pancreatic disease center. According to our previous study, an important flexion point in the learning curve is 250 cases. Data on the last 200 RPD cases were collected from January 2017 to December 2018. During that period, 634 patients underwent OPD. These patients were divided into 2 groups, and propensity score matching was used to minimize bias. The demographic data and operative outcomes were collected and analyzed. Analysis began May 2019., Exposures: Robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy and OPD., Main Outcomes and Measures: The short-term operative outcomes of RPD and OPD., Results: After 1:1 matching, 187 cases of RPD and OPD were recorded. In the RPD group, 78 patients (41.7%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 60.9 (11.4) years. In the OPD group, 80 patients (42.8%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 60.1 (10.8) years. Robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy had advantages in operative time (mean [SD], 279.7 [76.3] minutes vs 298.2 [78.3] minutes; P = .02), estimated blood loss (mean [SD], 297.3 [246.8] mL vs 415.2 [497.9] mL; P = .002), and postoperative length of hospital stay (mean [SD], 22.4 [16.7] days vs 26.1 [16.3] days; P = .03). However, there was no significant difference in the R0 resection rate and incidence rate of postoperative complications, such as postoperative pancreatic fistula, bile leak, and delayed gastric emptying. The incidence rates of postoperative bleeding and reoperation in the RPD group were similar to those in the OPD group, with no statistically significant difference., Conclusions and Relevance: After passing the learning curve, RPD had advantages in operative time and blood loss compared with OPD. There were no differences in postoperative complications such as postoperative pancreatic fistula, bile leak, and delayed gastric emptying. However, patients recovered more quickly after RPD than after OPD. A prospective randomized clinical trial is needed in the future to verify these results.

BACKGROUND Robotic assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) is reported to be safe and feasible. Internal hernia (IH) after RPD is a serious but rarely reported complication. MATERIAL AND METHODS We retrospectively reviewed data of 231 patients who underwent RPD from October 2010 to December 2016. The incidence, symptoms, time of presentation, and outcome were investigated. RESULTS Five patients (2.6%) were diagnosed with IH. Significant correlation (P<0.001) between IH and transverse mesocolon defect was confirmed. In patients without defect closure, the incidence of IH was 62.5%, while patients who received defect closure experienced no IH. The median time between initial surgery and occurrence of IH was 76 days. The main symptoms were abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting. All patients received abdominal computed tomography (CT) and were suspected to have IH according to imaging and symptoms. All patients underwent reoperation (2 laparoscopic and 3 open surgery). The median length of hospital stay was 13 days. No patient experienced a relapse after treatment. CONCLUSIONS Abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting were common symptoms in our study patients who underwent RPD. IH should be suspected if there is a positive finding on CT. Timely reoperation is necaAbdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting were common symptoms in our study patients who underwent RPD. IH should be suspected if there is a positive finding on CT. Timely reoperation is necessary because IH may cause intestinal ischemia. Meticulous closure of the mesenteric defect is vital to avoid IH.essary because IH may cause intestinal ischemia. Meticulous closure of the mesenteric defect is vital to avoid IH.

BACKGROUND Postoperative pancreatic fistulas (POPFs) due to anastomotic leaks are always closely related to significant morbidity and mortality following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). A series of modified anastomotic methods have been proposed. The object of our study was to provide a novel anastomotic method for operations involving the Child technique, termed the "whole-layer tightly appressed anastomosis technique". MATERIAL AND METHODS An improved pancreatic whole-layer suture technique was used when we performed the duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomies; this method ensured the tight joining of the pancreatic stump and jejunum and decreased the pinholes in the pancreatic stump. This new method was used in 41 patients, and was compared with the traditional duct-to-mucosa anastomosis technique that was used in 50 patients as controls. RESULTS The POPF rate was much lower in the new method group than in the control group (6, 14.63% and 20, 40.00%, respectively, P=0.010). There were 5 grade A POPF patients and 1 grade B POPF patient in the study group. In the control group there were 12 grade A POPFs patients, 7 grade B POPFs patients, and 1 grade C POPF patient. The study group exhibited a lower morbidity rate (7, 17.07% vs. 16, 32.00%, P=0.022) and a reduced hospital stay (17.16 d vs. 22.92 d, P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS The whole-layer tightly appressed anastomosis technique presented in our study is a safer anastomotic method than the traditional duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy technique. This new technique effectively reduced the incidence of POPF after PD and decreased the postoperative morbidity.

Purpose: Venous resection and reconstruction (VR) is a feasible surgical technique to achieve optimal outcomes in selected patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) who undergo open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). However, data regarding patient outcomes in patients who undergo VR in robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) are scarce. Methods: All patients with a diagnosis of PDAC who underwent upfront open or robotic pancreatoduodenectomy with VR in a high-volume institution for pancreatic surgery between 2011 and 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Perioperative and long-term outcomes were compared between the RPD and OPD cohorts. Results: A total of 84 patients were included in the final analysis, 14 patients underwent RPD with VR and 70 who had OPD with VR. Reconstructed venous patency, postoperative 30-day morbidity, and 90-day mortality were comparable; however, lymph node resection rates were lower in the RPC cohort (p = 0.029). No difference was identified in 3-year survival rates between the two groups (34.0% versus 25.7% respectively, p = 0.667). Conclusion: RPD with VR is a feasible approach for patients with PDAC and venous invasion. Further studies are needed to assess long-term outcomes compared to the open approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pancreatoduodenectomy is a complex and challenging procedure that requires meticulous tissue dissection and proficient suturing skills. Minimally invasive surgery with the utilization of robotic platforms has demonstrated advantages in perioperative patient outcomes in retrospective studies. The development of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) in specific has progressed significantly, since first reported in 2003, and high-volume centers in pancreatic surgery are reporting large patient series with improved pain management and reduced length of stay. However, prospective studies to assess objectively the feasibility and safety of RPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) are currently lacking.Methods/design: The PORTAL trial is a multicenter randomized controlled, patient-blinded, parallel-group, phase III non-inferiority trial performed in seven high-volume centers for pancreatic and robotic surgery in China (> 20 RPD and > 100 OPD annually in each participating center). The trial is designed to enroll and randomly assign 244 patients with an indication for elective pancreatoduodenectomy for malignant periampullary and pancreatic lesions, as well as premalignant and symptomatic benign periampullary and pancreatic disease. The primary outcome is time to functional recovery postoperatively, measured in days. Secondary outcomes include postoperative morbidity and mortality, as well as perioperative costs. A sub-cohort of 128 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) will also be compared to assess the percentage of patients who undergo postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy within 8 weeks, in each arm. Secondary outcomes in this cohort will include patterns of disease recurrence, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival.Discussion: The PORTAL trial is designed to assess the feasibility and safety of RPD compared to OPD, in terms of functional recovery as described previously. Additionally, this trial will explore whether RPD allows increased access to postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy, in a sub-cohort of patients with PDAC.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04400357 . Registered on May 22, 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Robotic-assisted minimally invasive surgery is associated with worse oncologic outcomes for some but not other types of cancers. We conducted a propensity score-matched analysis to compare oncologic outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic (RPD) vs. open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).Methods: Treatment-naïve PDAC patients undergoing either RPD or OPD at our hospital between January 2013 and December 2017 were included. Propensity score matching was conducted at a ratio of 1:2. The primary outcome was disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).Results: A total of 672 cases were identified. The propensity score-matched cohort included 105 patients receiving RPD and 210 patients receiving OPD. The 2 groups did not differ in the number of retrieved lymph nodes [11 (7-16) vs. 11 (6-17), P = 0.622] and R0 resection rate (88.6% vs. 89.0%, P = 0.899). There was no statistically significant difference in median DFS (14 [95% CI 11-22] vs. 12 [95% CI 10-14] months (HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.87-1.50; log-rank P = 0.345) and median OS (27 [95% CI 22-35] vs. 20 [95% CI 18-24] months (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.57-1.04; log-rank P = 0.087) between the two groups. Multivariate COX analysis showed that RPD was not an independent predictor of DFS (HR 0.90; 95% CI 0.68-1.19, P = 0.456) or OS (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.57-1.05, P = 0.094).Conclusion: Comparable DFS and OS were observed between patients receiving RPD and OPD. This preliminary finding requires further confirmation with prospective randomized controlled trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]