The risk of conversion in minimally invasive oncological abdominal surgery. Meta-analysis of randomized evidence comparing traditional laparoscopic versus robot-assisted techniques

A comprehensive analysis of robotic assisted vs. laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy using propensity score matching

Using the propensity-matched methodology, this meta-analysis and comprehensive review aimed to compare robotic distal pancreatectomy with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in terms of perioperative and short-term oncologic outcomes. Within the scope of this investigation, complete and total adherence to the PRISMA guidelines for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses was established. The search we conducted in PubMed, Google Scholar, and EMBASE was automated to find relevant papers that matched the tendency up to July 1, 2024. The length of time spent while operating, the rate of conversion, and the collection of lymph nodes were the primary factors that were considered. Other metrics that were taken into consideration were the approximate amount of blood loss, the length of time spent in the hospital, the need for transfusions, and the occurrence of major adverse events. In the end, there were 8 studies that involved 1649 patients. Of those patients, 758 had robotic assisted distal pancreatectomy, whereas 891 underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. In comparison to laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, the robotic assisted technique did result in higher anticipated blood loss and conversion rates; however, it also required longer durations of operation due to its lengthier duration. In terms of lymph node retrieval, the duration of hospital stay, the need for blood transfusions, and the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula, there were no distinctions that could be considered statistically significant between the two techniques. A realistic and risk-free surgical alternative is a distal pancreatectomy that is performed with the aid of robotic technology. When compared to laparoscopic surgery, the outcomes of robot-assisted surgery were superior in terms of conversion rates to laparotomy and less anticipated intraoperative blood loss. However, the operation took longer to complete than laparoscopic surgery.

Minimally Invasive Pauli Parastomal Hernia Repair

BACKGROUND

Although originally described as an open procedure, the application in the setting of minimally invasive surgery of the Pauli technique for parastomal hernia repair is gaining interest among surgeons owing to encouraging early results. We aimed at combining and analyzing the results of minimally invasive Pauli repair by assessing the available evidence.

METHODS

A literature search in Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science was undertaken to include all articles reporting on minimally invasive repair of parastomal hernias using the Pauli technique.

RESULTS

Data regarding a total of 75 patients across 11 articles published between 2019 and 2023 were included. Patients received surgery either by a laparoscopic (27%) or robotic (73%) approach. A transabdominal route was chosen in 62 patients (83%), while an extraperitoneal technique was employed in the remaining 13 patients. The rate of postoperative morbidity was 34%, with 10% being the incidence of grade >II complications. The reported overall rate of recurrence was 7% at a median follow-up of 1 to 43 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence derived from a growing number of centers suggests that minimally invasive Pauli repair is a viable option to treat parastomal hernias. Despite robust, high-level data still lacking, preliminary experiences indicate promising results.

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for sporadic benign insulinoma: Short- and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery is the optimal treatment for insulinoma. The present study aimed to compare short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic surgery for sporadic benign insulinoma.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic surgery for insulinoma at our center between September 2007 and December 2019 was conducted. The demographic, perioperative and postoperative follow-up results were compared between the laparoscopic and robotic groups.

RESULTS

A total of 85 patients were enrolled, including 36 with laparoscopic approach and 49 with robotic approach. Enucleation was the preferred surgical procedure. Fifty-nine patients (69.4%) underwent enucleation; among them, 26 and 33 patients underwent laparoscopic and robotic surgery, respectively. Robotic enucleation had a lower conversion rate to laparotomy (0 vs. 19.2%, P = 0.013), shorter operative time (102.0 vs. 145.5 min, P = 0.008) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (6.0 vs. 8.5 d, P = 0.002) than laparoscopic enucleation. There were no differences between the groups in terms of intraoperative blood loss, the rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula and complications. After a median follow-up of 65 months, two patients in the laparoscopic group developed a functional recurrence and none of the patients in the robotic group had a recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic enucleation can reduce the conversion rate to laparotomy and shorten operative time, which might lead to a reduction in postoperative hospital stay.

Robotic Extended Ultrasound-Guided Distal Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Metastases from Uveal Melanoma

BACKGROUND

Isolated pancreatic metastasis from melanoma is extremely uncommon and accounts for approximately only 2% of visceral disseminations of melanoma.1-3 Interestingly, pancreatic localizations disproportionately derive from primary ocular melanoma.1,2 Despite the currently available evidence on this argument being scarce, the survival outcomes of patients receiving resection for visceral melanoma metastases are reported to be superior than those managed by non-surgical modalities.4,5 CASE PRESENTATION: A 59-year-old female with a history of uveal melanoma presented with surveillance-detected metastatic disease confined to the pancreas. Computed tomography demonstrated one lesion located in the body of the pancreas and one further lesion in the head. The presented video illustrates the details of an extended, ultrasound-guided, robotic distal pancreatectomy.

DISCUSSION

Metastatic ocular melanoma has a highly variable natural history, which ranges from a fulminant course to prolonged stable disease.6 In contrast to cutaneous melanoma derivation, metastases mostly occur via hematogenous spread, in the absence of lymphatic drainage of the eye.6,7 Liver is the most common site of secondary localization and is not involved by metastatic disease in <10% of cases. Interestingly, patients with extrahepatic metastases tend to have significantly better survival rates than those with hepatic disease.6,7 Fewer than 100 cases of pancreatic metastasis from malignant melanoma are reported in the medical literature, including a relatively high percentage of primary ocular malignancies.1,5 Furthermore, the prognosis of these patients is essentially unknown, although metastatic melanoma of both cutaneous and ocular origin generally indicates poor survival.1,5,6 Although no robust evidence is available, a number of reports suggest that pancreatic resection may improve survival in these patients.1-4 A large retrospective review investigating the association between treatment modalities and survival of patients with abdominal visceral melanoma metastases showed that patients receiving resection had a superior median survival compared with patients treated medically. Although patients with metastases of the gastrointestinal tract showed the best outcomes following surgery, patients with pancreas metastasis (of both cutaneous and ocular origin) undergoing resection also exhibited a significant survival advantage compared with those treated non-surgically.5 Minimally invasive pancreatectomy is gaining momentum.8 In fact, in selected patients there are distinct advantages compared with conventional surgery owing to reduced postoperative morbidity and earlier return to daily activities, while maintaining the oncological tenets of resection.8-10 Recent reports suggest that the application of robots may provide some advantages over conventional laparoscopy, especially for patients necessitating technically challenging surgeries.8,11 Such benefits are mainly in relation to the rate of conversion, length of postoperative hospital stay, and number of cases necessary to surmount the learning curve and reach optimal performance; however, no definitive conclusions can be drawn due to the lack of high-level evidence.8,10.

Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic technique for the treatment of left-sided colonic diverticular disease: a systematic review with meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Minimally invasive surgery has been universally accepted as a valid option for the treatment of diverticular disease, provided specific expertise is available. Over the last decade, there has been a growing interest in the application of robotic approaches for diverticular disease. We aimed at evaluating whether robotic colectomy may offer some advantages over the laparoscopic approach for surgical treatment of diverticular disease by meta-analyzing the available data from the medical literature.

METHODS

The PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and Web Of Sciences electronic databases were searched for literature up to December 2020. Inclusion criteria considered all comparative studies evaluating robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy for diverticulitis eligible. The conversion rate to the open approach was evaluated as the primary outcome.

RESULTS

The data of 4177 patients from nine studies were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics. Patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy compared to those who underwent surgery with a robotic approach had a significantly higher risk of conversion into an open procedure (12.5% vs. 7.4%, p < 0.00001) and abbreviated hospital stay (p < 0.0001) at the price of a longer operating time (p < 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

Compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery, the robotic approach offers significant advantages in terms of conversion rate and shortened hospital stay for the treatment of diverticular disease. However, because of the lack of available evidence, it is impossible to draw definitive conclusions.

A comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: Propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the perioperative and pathologic outcomes of robotic distal pancreatectomy compared with a laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

A total of 121 robotic distal pancreatectomies and 992 laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies were retrospectively evaluated, comparing the demographic, perioperative and pathologic outcomes. After 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM) with 11 demographic variables, the factors were analysed again.

RESULTS

Following PSM, 104 robotic distal pancreatectomy patients were compared with 208 laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy patients. The operation time and proportion of spleen preservation were not different between the groups. The rates of open conversion were lower, whereas the hospital costs were higher in the robotic group. Other perioperative outcomes and pathologic factors did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Although robotic distal pancreatectomy is more expensive, this operation is feasible, with a higher probability of proceeding with the planned operation and with low open conversion rate.

Review on Perioperative and Oncological Outcomes of Robotic Gastrectomy for Cancer

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive gastrectomy is currently considered a valid option to treat gastric cancer and is gaining increasing acceptance. Recent reports have suggested that the application of robots may confer some advantages over conventional laparoscopy, but the role of robotic surgery in clinical practice is still uncertain. We aimed to critically review the relevant evidence comparing robotic to standard laparoscopic surgery in performing radical gastrectomy.

METHODS

The Pubmed/Medline electronic databases were searched through February 2021. Paper conference and the English language was the only restriction applied to our search strategy.

RESULTS

According to the existing data, robotic gastrectomy seems to provide some benefits in terms of blood loss, rate of conversion, procedure-specific postoperative morbidity, and length of hospital stay. Robotic gastrectomy is also associated with a longer duration of surgery and a higher economic burden as compared to its laparoscopic counterpart. No significant differences have been disclosed in terms of long-term survivals, while the number of lymph nodes retrieved with robotic gastrectomy is generally higher than that of laparoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

The current literature suggests that robotic radical gastrectomy appears as competent as the conventional laparoscopic procedure and may provide some clinical advantages. However, due to the relative paucity of high-level evidence, it is not possible to draw definitive conclusions.