Robot-assisted pancreatic surgery

Exploring the Impact of the Physical Environment on Robotic-Assisted Surgery Outcomes and Processes: A Scoping Review

ObjectiveThe purpose of this scoping review is to identify physical environmental facilitators and barriers related to performing robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in operating rooms (ORs).BackgroundAs new robotic surgery technology is developed and brought to market, there is a need to understand how existing and future operating rooms are adapted and designed to support patient safety, surgical workflow, and teamwork. This review will focus on literature related to physical environment factors that impact workflow and communication, as well as the adoption of RAS technology.MethodThe scoping review search was conducted during November 2022, following the PRISMA guidelines. An independent reviewer screened articles for inclusion and exclusion and two independent reviewers completed a quality appraisal was on the included articles.ResultsOf the 9325 texts screened, 28 articles were included for analysis. The primary physical environment and outcome variables were extracted and synthesized under the following categories: RAS process or task-related, environmental features, environmental qualities, and staff or patient outcomes.ConclusionThe physical environment of the OR, such as OR layout, OR size, environmental noise, and dedicated robotic ORs played a significant role in efficiency and workflow outcomes for RAS, as well as workload measures, staff and patient safety, and surgical performance.ApplicationSince there are minimal evidence-based resources available for the application of RAS, this review provides distinct connections between RAS outcomes and specific environmental features for considerations among design researchers, architects, human factors professionals, hospital administrators, and practitioners to aid in decision making during and after implementation of RAS technology.

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy after open Roux-en-Y biliary-enteric anastomosis: Technical insights (with video)

TECHNIQUE

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) presents a formidable surgical challenge for patients with a prior history of bilioenteric anastomosis. However, there are no reports in the literature of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy after open bilioenteric anastomosis. This article offers a detailed description of the surgical technique employed in performing RPD on a patient who previously underwent open Roux-en-Y biliary-enteric anastomosis, aiming to treat a duodenal tumor.

RESULTS

The patient underwent a successful surgery with a total operation time of 320 min and an estimated blood loss of approximately 150 ml. Following the procedure, the patient experienced an uncomplicated recovery and was discharged from the hospital after a 14-day hospitalization period. Postoperative pathology revealed a moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma of the duodenum invading the entire layer of the bowel wall.

CONCLUSIONS

RPD is a safe and viable option for patients with a history of complex abdominal surgery.

Robotic pancreatic surgery: minimally invasive approach to challenging operations

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic surgery is still associated with high perioperative morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to present the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted pancreatic surgery, including pancreaticoduodenectomy (RAPD), distal pancreatectomy (RDP) with or without splenectomy, enucleation (REN), and atypical resection (RAR), for benign, borderline, and malignant lesions at a high-volume center.

METHODS

A single-center, prospective database was used to retrospectively analyze the early outcomes of robotic pancreatic procedures completed between 2014 and 2020. Out of 124 attempted operations, 3 patients received palliative robotic surgery (2.4%). Of the remaining 121, 14 (11.6%) were converted to open surgery. The robotic procedures included 107 patients: 56 underwent RAPD, 31 underwent RDP (28 with and 3 without splenectomy), 16 underwent REN, and 4 underwent RAR (2 central and 2 total pancreatectomies).

RESULTS

The preoperative baseline characteristics and comorbidities were consistent with those of a Western population. The overall incidence of complications was 43.9%, with the more severe (Clavien-Dindo III-IV) occurring after RAPD (19.6%). We collected 7 (13.1%) postoperative pancreatic fistulae after RAPD, 5 (16.1%) after RADP, and 2 (12.5%) after REN. The two central pancreatectomies developed a biochemical leak without sequelae. Three patients (2.8%) died within 90 days after surgery. Early refeeding was achieved in those who did not experience severe complications, while the median hospital stay was 8 days. The median number of harvested lymph nodes was 22, with non-R1 microscopic residual tumors found.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic pancreatic surgery is a safe and oncologically adequate technique to manage benign and malignant diseases arising from the head, body, and tail of the pancreas.

Single-centre comparison of robotic and open pancreatoduodenectomy: a propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

Pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic head and periampullary cancers is still associated with high perioperative morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RAPD) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) performed in a high-volume centre.

METHODS

A single-centre, prospective database was used to retrospectively compare the early outcomes of RAPD procedures to standard OPD procedures completed between January 2014 and December 2018. Of the 121 included patients, 78 underwent RAPD and 43 underwent OPD. After propensity score matching (PSM), 35 RAPD patients were matched with 35 OPD patients with similar preoperative characteristics.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in most of the baseline demographics and perioperative outcomes in the two groups after PSM optimization with the exception of the operative time (530 min (RAPD) versus 335 min (OPD) post-match, p < 0.000). No differences were found between the two groups in terms of complications (including pancreatic leaks, 11.4% in both OPD and RAPD), perioperative mortality, reoperations or readmissions. Earlier refeeding was obtained in the RAPD group vs. the OPD group (3 vs. 4 days, p = 0.002). Although the differences in the length of the hospital stay and blood transfusions were not statistically significant, both parameters showed a positive trend in favour of RAPD. The number of harvested lymph nodes was similar and oncologically adequate.

CONCLUSIONS

RAPD is a safe and oncologically adequate technique to treat malignancies arising from the pancreatic head and periampullary region. Several perioperative parameters resulted in trends favouring RAPD over OPD, at the price of longer operating time. Data should be reinforced with a larger sample to guarantee statistical significance.

Robotic-assisted versus open total pancreatectomy: a propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

Total pancreatectomy (TP) is a complex surgical procedure with significant postoperative morbidity. Despite the narrowed range of indications for TP, the introduction of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the increasing complexity of surgical resections performed in high-volume centers has increased the number of annually performed TPs, especially regarding malignant disease. The introduction of robotic-assisted pancreatic surgery has provided a novel and minimally invasive approach for TP, yet the feasibility of this technique is still unknown. This study assessed the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted total pancreatectomy (RTP) compared to conventional open total pancreatectomy (OTP).

METHODS

All patients who underwent TP between March 2015 and July 2019 in a high-volume institution for pancreatic surgery were included in this retrospective study. Clinical data and perioperative outcomes were derived from the prospectively maintained institutional database. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) method was utilized to compare the RTP and OTP cohorts to minimize bias.

RESULTS

A standardized surgical protocol was utilized for RTP following a learning curve of RPD and RDP. The median operative time for patients who underwent RTP was significantly decreased compared to those who underwent OTP [300 (IQR, 250-360) vs. 360 min (IQR, 300-525), P=0.031]. Additionally, en bloc resection and spleen-preserving rates were also higher in the RTP cohort. Major 30-day morbidity (Clavien-Dindo > IIIa) and 90-day mortality were similar between the two cohorts. After a median follow-up time of 15 (IQR, 8-24) months, both the RTP and OTP cohorts had a comparable quality of life regarding exocrine and endocrine insufficiency.

CONCLUSIONS

RTP appears to be safe and feasible when utilized in high-volume centers for the indicated management of benign and highly selected malignant pancreatic disease. However, further prospective randomized studies are needed to assess the feasibility of this approach.

Robotic surgery and its impact on teamwork in the operating theatre

Effective teamwork in the operating theatre is important for safe patient care. In robotic surgery, the surgeon is physically separated from the operating theatre team, which could potentially have an impact on teamwork. With robotic surgery increasing internationally, this article reviews relevant published literature on teamwork in the operating theatre and reflects on how this might be impacted by robotic surgery. We conclude by describing a research study we are currently undertaking on this topic.

Initial Experience With Robotic Pancreatic Surgery: Technical Feasibility and Oncological Implications

Robotic surgery has been introduced in the field of minimally invasive surgery to improve the handling of high-demanding procedures with encouraging results. We aimed to evaluate the clinical safety and the oncological adequacy of robot-assisted pancreatic surgery by analyzing a consecutive series in terms of surgical and oncological outcomes. A total of 53 consecutive cases including 36 pancreatoduodenectomies (PD) and 14 distal pancreatectomies (DP) were evaluated. The overall postoperative morbidity and mortality were 32% and 3.8%, respectively. Radical resection was achieved in 93.7% of PD and 100% of DP, with a mean number of harvested lymph nodes of 29.8 for PD and 20.5 for DP. The 3-year cumulative overall survival was 44.2% and 73.9% for patient with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and nonductal malignancy, respectively. Robotic technology may be useful to reproduce conventional open pancreatic surgery with a minimally invasive approach, overcoming some of the intrinsic limitations of conventional laparoscopy.

Minimally invasive surgical approach to pancreatic malignancies

Pancreatic surgery for malignancy is recognized as challenging for the surgeons and risky for the patients due to consistent perioperative morbidity and mortality. Furthermore, the oncological long-term results are largely disappointing, even for those patients who experience an uneventfully hospital stay. Nevertheless, surgery still remains the cornerstone of a multidisciplinary treatment for pancreatic cancer. In order to maximize the benefits of surgery, the advent of both laparoscopy and robotics has led many surgeons to treat pancreatic cancers with these new methodologies. The reduction of postoperative complications, length of hospital stay and pain, together with a shorter interval between surgery and the beginning of adjuvant chemotherapy, represent the potential advantages over conventional surgery. Lastly, a better cosmetic result, although not crucial in any cancerous patient, could also play a role by improving overall well-being and patient self-perception. The laparoscopic approach to pancreatic surgery is, however, difficult in inexperienced hands and requires a dedicated training in both advanced laparoscopy and pancreatic surgery. The recent large diffusion of the da Vinci(®) robotic platform seems to facilitate many of the technical maneuvers, such as anastomotic biliary and pancreatic reconstructions, accurate lymphadenectomy, and vascular sutures. The two main pancreatic operations, distal pancreatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy, are approachable by a minimally invasive path, but more limited interventions such as enucleation are also feasible. Nevertheless, a word of caution should be taken into account when considering the increasing costs of these newest technologies because the main concerns regarding these are the maintenance of all oncological standards and the lack of long-term follow-up. The purpose of this review is to examine the evidence for the use of minimally invasive surgery in pancreatic cancer (and less aggressive tumors), with particular attention to the oncological results and widespread reproducibility of each technique.