Robotic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: the Verona experience

Superiority of Robotic Over Laparoscopic Spleen-Preserving Distal Pancreatectomy With Warshaw Procedure for Reducing the Incidence of Postoperative Splenic Infarction

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with Warshaw procedure (MI-WP), has gained widespread recognition for the treatment of benign and low-grade malignant tumors of the pancreatic body and tail. However, the comparative advantages of the robotic Warshaw procedure (R-WP) over the laparoscopic Warshaw procedure (L-WP) remain uncertain. This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes between R-WP and L-WP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Among the 146 cases of MI-DP conducted between October 2020 and December 2023 (L-DP:115, R-DP:31), 33 cases of MI-WP were subjected to analysis, comprising the R-WP group (n=10) and the L-WP group (n=23).

RESULTS

R-WP successfully completed all procedures under a purely laparoscopic approach, whereas L-WP necessitated conversion to open surgery in 2 cases (8.7%). Despite the significantly prolonged operative time in R-WP compared with L-WP (R-WP vs. L-WP: 421vs. 300 min), there was no significant difference in estimated blood loss between the 2 groups (R-WP vs. L-WP: 19 vs. 20 mL). Although the rate of major complications did not significantly differ between the 2 groups, 2 cases (8.7%) of L-WP required reoperation, including splenectomy in 1 instance. Furthermore, the incidence of postoperative splenic infarction was significantly higher in L-WP than in R-WP (R- vs. L-WP:0 vs. 43.5%, P =0.015). The length of hospital stay after surgery did not exhibit a significant difference between the 2 groups (R-WP vs. L-WP: 11 vs. 12 d).

DISCUSSION

R-WP demonstrated superiority to L-WP for reducing the incidence of postoperative splenic infarction, potentially contributing to enhancing the spleen preservation rate.

Nationwide cost-effectiveness and quality of life analysis of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

This study analyzed the Quality of Life (QoL) and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic (LDP) versus robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP).

METHODS

Consecutive patients submitted to LDP or RDP from 2010 to 2020 in four high-volume Italian centers were included, with a minimum of 12 months of postoperative follow-up were included. QoL was evaluated using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D questionnaires, self-reported by patients. After a propensity score matching, which included BMI, gender, operation time, multiorgan and vascular resections, splenic preservation, and pancreatic stump management, the mean differential cost and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY) were calculated and plotted on a cost-utility plane.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 564 patients. Among these, 271 (49%) patients were submitted to LDP, while 293 (51%) patients to RDP. After propensity score matching, the study population was composed of 159 patients in each group, with a median follow-up of 59 months. As regards the QoL analysis, global health and emotional functioning domains showed better results in the RDP group (p = 0.037 and p = 0.026, respectively), whereas the other did not differ. As expected, the median crude costs analysis confirmed that RDP was more expensive than LDP (16,041 Euros vs. 10,335 Euros, p < 0.001). However, the robotic approach had a higher probability of being more cost-effective than the laparoscopic procedure when a willingness to pay more than 5697 Euros/QALY was accepted.

CONCLUSION

RDP was associated with better QoL as explored by specific domains. Crude costs were higher for RDP, and the cost-effectiveness threshold was set at 5697 euros/QALY.

Learning curve of robotic-assisted splenic vessel-preserving spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy by one single surgeon: a retrospective cohort study

AIM

Splenic vessel-preserving spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SVP-SPDP) has a lower risk of splenic infarction than the splenicvessel-sacrificing SPDP, but it is more technically demanding. Learning curve of robotic-assisted SVP-SPDP (RSVP-SPDP) remains unreported. This study sought to analyze the perioperative outcomes and learning curve of RSVP-SPDP by one single surgeon.

METHODS

Seventy-four patients who were intended to receive RSVP-SPDP at the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University between May 2015 and January 2023 were included. The learning curve were retrospectively analyzed by using cumulative sum (CUSUM) analyses.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients underwent RSVP-SPDP (spleen preservation rate: 83.8%). According to CUSUM curve, the operation time (median, 318 vs. 220 min; P < 0.001) and intraoperative blood loss (median, 50 vs. 50 mL; P = 0.012) was improved significantly after 16 cases. Blood transfusion rate (12.5% vs. 3.4%; P = 0.202), postoperative major morbidity rate (6.3% vs. 3.4%; P = 0.524), and postoperative length-of-stay (median, 10 vs. 8 days; P = 0.120) improved after 16 cases but did not reach statistical difference. None of the patients had splenic infarction or abscess postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

RSVP-SPDP was a safe and feasible approach for selected patients after learning curve. The improvement of operation time and intraoperative blood loss was achieved after 16 cases.

"Parenchyma transection-first" strategy is superior to "tunnel-first" strategy in robotic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with conservation of splenic vessels

BACKGROUND

Creating a tunnel between the pancreas and splenic vessels followed by pancreatic parenchyma transection ("tunnel-first" strategy) has long been used in spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) with splenic vessel preservation (Kimura's procedure). However, the operation space is limited in the tunnel, leading to the risks of bleeding and difficulties in suturing. We adopted the pancreatic "parenchyma transection-first" strategy to optimize Kimura's procedure.

METHODS

The clinical data of consecutive patients who underwent robotic SPDP with Kimura's procedure between January 2017 and September 2022 at our center were retrieved. The cohort was classified into a "parenchyma transection-first" strategy (P-F) group and a "tunnel-first" strategy (T-F) group and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 91 patients were enrolled in this cohort, with 49 in the T-F group and 42 in the P-F group. Compared with the T-F group, the P-F group had significantly shorter operative time (146.1 ± 39.2 min vs. 174.9 ± 46.6 min, P < 0.01) and lower estimated blood loss [40.0 (20.0-55.0) mL vs. 50.0 (20.0-100.0) mL, P = 0.03]. Failure of splenic vessel preservation occurred in 10.2% patients in the T-F group and 2.4% in the P-F group (P = 0.14). The grade 3/4 complications were similar between the two groups (P = 0.57). No differences in postoperative pancreatic fistula, abdominal infection or hemorrhage were observed between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The pancreatic "parenchyma transection-first" strategy is safe and feasible compared with traditional "tunnel-first strategy" in SPDP with Kimura's procedure.

Preliminary experience with a new robotic technique to facilitate distal pancreatectomy with spleen preservation: left lateral approach in right lateral decubitus position

Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SP-DP), for patients with benign or small low-grade malignant tumors of the body or tail of the pancreas, is the ideal procedure although it is technically demanding. The robotic da Vinci system has been introduced to overcome these technical challenges and reduce operative risks. We report our experience of a new variation in surgical technique: the left lateral approach robotic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (RSP-DP) in right lateral decubitus position. We performed this new variant of SP-DP, in five patients, using the da Vinci Xi system. Technical and clinical feasibility are described. The mean age and body mass index were 53.4 years and 31.4 kg/m2, respectively. The mean total operative time was 323 min. The estimated mean blood loss was 240 ml. In all patients, the spleen could be preserved. In four patients, the splenic vessels were also preserved. One patient required a Warshaw technique due to significant fibrosis attached to the splenic vein. The postoperative period of all patients was uneventful except the presence of biochemical leak (BL) in two patients that only required maintenance of the drainage at home. The mean length of hospital stay was 6 days after surgery. The left lateral approach robotic SP-DP in right lateral decubitus position is a feasible and safe procedure for distal benign or small low-grade malignant tumors of the left pancreas. The right lateral decubitus position associated to robotic surgery can facilitate this complex procedure, especially when splenic vessels preservation is indicated, with a lower risk of conversion and shortening of the learning curve.

Robotic versus open total pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Limited data are available on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing robotic total pancreatectomy (RTP). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the postoperative outcomes of RTP and open total pancreatectomy (OTP). We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis according to the PRISMA 2020 and AMSTAR 2 guidelines. We included studies conducted through August 10, 2022, that systematically searched electronic databases and compared RTP with OTP. We retained four controlled clinical trials in the literature search, including 156 patients: 65 in the RTP group and 91 in the OTP group. There was no difference between the RTP group and OTP group in terms of mortality, severe complications, morbidity, bleeding, biliary leak, delayed gastric emptying, reoperation, operative time, length of stay, harvested lymph nodes, and positive resection margin. The RTP reduces the delay of the first liquid diet, first oral diet, and out of bed. RTP is feasible and safe in selected patients. Robotic surgery allows for a quicker recovery. In cases of major vessel invasion, conversion to laparotomy should be preoperatively considered.

Kimura's vs Warshaw's technique for spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of high-quality studies

BACKGROUND

Spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) represents a widely adopted procedure in the presence of benign or low-grade malignant tumors. Splenic vessels preservation and resection (Kimura and Warshaw techniques respectively) represent the two main surgical modalities to avoid splenic resection. Each one is characterized by strengths and drawbacks. The aim of the present study is to systematically review the current high-quality evidence regarding these two techniques and analyze their short-term outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA, AMSTAR II and MOOSE guidelines. The primary endpoint was to assess the incidence of splenic infarction and splenic infarction leading to splenectomy. As secondary endpoints, specific intraoperative variables and postoperative complications were explored. Metaregression analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of general variables on specific outcomes.

RESULTS

Seventeen high-quality studies were included in quantitative analysis. A significantly lower risk of splenic infarction for patients undergoing Kimura SPDP (OR = 0.14; p < 0.0001). Similarly, splenic vessel preservation was associated with a reduced risk of gastric varices (OR = 0.1; 95% p < 0.0001). Regarding all secondary outcome variables, no differences between the two techniques were noticed. Metaregression analysis failed to identify independent predictors of splenic infarction, blood loss, and operative time among general variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Although Kimura and Warshaw SPDP have been demonstrated comparable for most of postoperative outcomes, the former resulted superior compared to the latter in reducing the risk of splenic infarction and gastric varices. For benign pancreatic tumors and low-grade malignancies Kimura SPDP may be preferred.

401 consecutive minimally invasive distal pancreatectomies: lessons learned from 20 years of experience

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to discuss and report the trend, outcomes, and learning curve effect after minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) at two high-volume centres.

METHODS

Patients undergoing MIDP between January 1999 and December 2018 were retrospectively identified from prospectively maintained electronic databases. The entire cohort was divided into two groups constituting the "early" and "recent" phases. The learning curve effect was analyzed for laparoscopic (LDP) and robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). The follow-up was at least 2 years.

RESULTS

The study population included 401 consecutive patients (LDP n = 300, RDP n = 101). Twelve surgeons performed MIDP during the study period. Although patients were more carefully selected in the early phase, in terms of median age (49 vs. 55 years, p = 0.026), ASA class higher than 2 (3% vs. 9%, p = 0.018), previous abdominal surgery (10% vs. 34%, p < 0.001), and pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) (7% vs. 15%, p = 0.017), the recent phase had similar perioperative outcomes. The increase of experience in LDP was inversely associated with the operative time (240 vs 210 min, p < 0.001), morbidity rate (56.5% vs. 40.1%, p = 0.005), intra-abdominal collection (28.3% vs. 17.3%, p = 0.023), and length of stay (8 vs. 7 days, p = 0.009). Median survival in the PDAC subgroup was 53 months.

CONCLUSION

In the setting of high-volume centres, the surgical training of MIDP is associated with acceptable rates of morbidity. The learning curve can be largely achieved by several team members, improving outcomes over time. Whenever possible resection of PDAC guarantees adequate oncological results and survival.

A randomized controlled trial of stapled versus ultrasonic transection in distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

The pancreatic transection method during distal pancreatectomy is thought to influence postoperative fistula rates. Yet, the optimal technique for minimizing fistula occurrence is still unclear. The present randomized controlled trial compared stapled versus ultrasonic transection in elective distal pancreatectomy.

METHODS

Patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy from July 2018 to July 2020 at two high-volume institutions were considered for inclusion. Exclusion criteria were contiguous organ resection and a parenchymal thickness > 17 mm on intraoperative ultrasound. Eligible patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to stapled transection (Endo GIA Reinforced Reload with Tri-Staple Technology®) or ultrasonic transection (Harmonic Focus® + or Harmonic Ace® + shears). The primary endpoint was postoperative pancreatic fistula. Secondary endpoints included overall complications, abdominal collections, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Overall, 72 patients were randomized in the stapled transection arm and 73 patients in the ultrasonic transection arm. Postoperative pancreatic fistula occurred in 23 patients (16%), with a comparable incidence between groups (12% in stapled transection versus 19% in ultrasonic dissection arm, p = 0.191). Overall complications did not differ substantially (35% in stapled transection versus 44% in ultrasonic transection arm, p = 0.170). There was an increased incidence of abdominal collections in the ultrasonic dissection group (32% versus 14%, p = 0.009), yet the need for percutaneous drain did not differ between randomization arms (p = 0.169). The median length of stay was 8 days in both groups (p = 0.880). Intraoperative blood transfusion was the only factor independently associated with postoperative pancreatic fistula on logistic regression analysis (OR 4.8, 95% CI 1.2-20.0, p = 0.032).

CONCLUSION

The present randomized controlled trial of stapled versus ultrasonic transection in elective distal pancreatectomy demonstrated no significant difference in postoperative pancreatic fistula rates and no substantial clinical impact on other secondary endpoints.

The clinical and economic impact of surgical site infections after distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

The present study aimed to evaluate surgical site infections' clinical and economic impact after distal pancreatectomy.

METHODS

The study was a prospective, monocentric, observational study, including all adult patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy. According to the American Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition, the surgical site infection assessment was prospectively performed by trained personnel. The Accordion Severity Grading System was used to evaluate the clinical burden of surgical site infection. The hospitalization's total costs were calculated using the hospital expenditure report, excluding the intraoperative costs.

RESULTS

During the study period, 414 distal pancreatectomies were performed. The overall incidence of surgical site infection was 26% (106 patients). Surgical site infections were associated with a higher body mass index (P = .022, odds ratio 1.2), positive preoperative rectal swab for multidrug resistant bacteria (P = .010, odds ratio 4.2), and increased operative time (P = .037, odds ratio 1.1). Using the Accordion Severity Grading System, surgical site infections contributed significantly to the total clinical burden (25.5%) and prolonged hospitalization (P < .001). Furthermore, surgical site infection doubled the costs (12.915 vs 6.888 euros, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Surgical site infection has a high clinical burden, negatively impacting the postoperative course. The costs and length of stay proportionally increased with the surgical site infection severity, doubling the hospitalization expenses.

Modified Frailty Index to Assess Risk in Elderly Patients Undergoing Distal Pancreatectomy: A Retrospective Single-Center Study

BACKGROUND

To compare the postoperative course of elderly patients (≥70 years) submitted to minimally invasive (MIDP) versus open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) and to evaluate if the modified Frailty Index (mFI) predicts the surgical course of elderly patients submitted to DP.

METHODS

Data of patients aged ≥70 who underwent DP at a single institution between March 2011 and December 2019 were retrospectively retrieved. A 2:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was used to correct for differences in baseline characteristics. Then, postoperative complications were compared between the two groups (MIDP vs. ODP). Additionally, the entire cohort of DP elderly patients was stratified according to the mFI into three groups: non-frail (mFI = 0), mildly frail (mFI = 1/2), or severely frail (mFI = 3) and then compared.

RESULTS

A total of 204 patients were analyzed. After PSM, 40 MIDP and 80 ODP patients were identified. The complications considered stratified homogenously between the two groups, with no statistically significant differences. The severity of the postoperative course increased as mFI did among the three groups regarding any complication (p = 0.022), abdominal collection (p = 0.014), pulmonary complication (p = 0.001), postoperative confusion (p = 0.047), Clavien-Dindo severity ≥3 events (p = 0.036), and length of stay (p = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly patients can be safely submitted to MIDP. The mFI identifies frail elderly patients more prone to develop surgical and non-surgical complications after DP.

Robotic Dual-Console Distal Pancreatectomy: Could it be Considered a Safe Approach and Surgical Teaching even in Pancreatic Surgery? A Retrospective Observational Study Cohort

BACKGROUND

The study aims to assess the safety and feasibility of the robotic dual-console during a robotic distal pancreatectomy METHODS: The data of the consecutive patients submitted to RDP from 2012 to 2019 at the Verona University were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. The patients submitted to RDP were divided into the dual-console platform group (DG) and compared to the standard robotic procedure group (SG).

RESULTS

In the study period, 102 robotic distal pancreatectomies were performed, of whom 42 patients (41%) belonged to the DG and 60 patients (59%) to the SG. Higher operation time was recorded in the DG compared to the SG (410 vs. 265 min, p < 0.001). The overall conversion rate of the series was 7% (n 7 patients). All the conversions were observed in the SG (p = 0.021). No differences in morbidity or pancreatic fistula rate were recorded (p > 0.05). No mortality events in the 90th postoperative days were reported in this series.

CONCLUSIONS

The robotic dual-console approach for distal pancreatectomy is safe, feasible, and reproducible. The postoperative surgical outcomes are comparable to the standard RDP with the single-console da Vinci Surgical System®. This surgical technique can widely and safely improve the robotic surgical training program.

Robotic pancreas surgery: an overview of history and update on technique, outcomes, and financials

The use robotics in surgery is gaining momentum. This approach holds substantial promise in pancreas surgery. Robotic surgery for pancreatic lesions and malignancies has become well accepted and is expanding to more and more center annually. The number of centers using robotics in pancreatic surgery is rapidly increasing. The most studied robotic pancreas surgeries are pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy. Most studies are in their early phases, but they report that robotic pancreas surgery is safe feasible. Robotic pancreas surgery offers several advantages over open and laparoscopic techniques. Data regarding costs of robotics versus conventional techniques is still lacking. Robotic pancreas surgery is still in its early stages. It holds promise to become the new surgical standard for pancreatic resections in the future, however, more research is still needed to establish its safety, cost effectiveness and efficacy in providing the best outcomes.

Robotic versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Spleen-Preserving Distal Pancreatectomies: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

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.

Feasibility and safety of robotic-assisted total pancreatectomy: a pilot western series

This study was designed to demonstrate non-inferiority of robot-assisted total pancreatectomy (RATP) to open total pancreatectomy (OPT) based on an intention-to-treat analysis, having occurrence of severe post-operative complications (SPC) as primary study endpoint. The two groups were matched (2:1) by propensity scores. Assuming a rate of SPC of 22.5% (non-inferiority margin: 15%; α: 0.05; β: 0.20; power: 80%), a total of 25 patients were required per group. During the study period (October 2008–December 2019), 209 patients received a total pancreatectomy. After application of exclusion and inclusion criteria, matched groups were extracted from an overall cohort of 132 patients (OPT: 107; RATP: 25). Before matching, the two groups were different with respect to prevalence of cardiac disease (24.3% versus 4.0%; p = 0.03), presence of jaundice (45.8% versus 12.0%; p = 0.002), presence of a biliary drainage (23.4% versus 0; p  = 0.004), history of weight loss (28.0% versus 8.0%; p = 0.04), and vein involvement (55.1% versus 28.0%) (p = 0.03). After matching, the two groups (OTP: 50; RATP: 25) were well balanced. Regarding primary study endpoint, SPC developed in 13 patients (26.0%) after OTP and in 6 patients (24.0%) after RATP (p = 0.85). Regarding secondary study endpoints, RATP was associated with longer median operating times [475 (408.8–582.5) versus 585 min (525–637.5) p = 0.003]. After a median follow-up time of 23.7 months (10.4–71), overall survival time [22.6 (11.2–81.2) versus NA (27.3–NA) p = 0.006] and cancer-specific survival [22.6 (11.2–NA) versus NA (27.3–NA) p = 0.02] were improved in patients undergoing RATP. In carefully selected patients, robot-assisted total pancreatectomy is non-inferior to open total pancreatectomy regarding occurrence of severe post-operative complications.

The standardized technique in robotic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy using the flip-up approach

PURPOSE

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) was first introduced in 2003. It has been accepted as an alternative technique for pancreatic cancer of the body and tail. However, robotic RAMPS is not yet popular because of its technical difficulty and lack of standardized technique. This study describes in detail the standard steps of robotic RAMPS using the flip-up approach with the benefit of a robotic view when treating pancreatic cancer of the body and tail.

METHOD

We took advantage of our single-center experience to provide a step-by-step technique of robotic RAMPS procedure using the da Vinci Si system.

RESULTS

We divided the procedure into 11 key steps. The surgical steps are optimized to achieve margin-negative curative resection and sufficient regional lymphadenectomy. The artery-first approach is usually used to determine tumor resectability early before performing an irreversible operative step. We also determine the borders of surgical resection and divide the splenic artery after dividing the pancreatic neck and the splenic vein, which facilitates a complete lymphadenectomy around the celiac axis with a bottom-up view.

CONCLUSION

Robotic RAMPS using the flip-up approach is safe and feasible in performing curative resection for well-selected pancreatic cancer of the body and tail. A randomized controlled trial comparing open and robotic RAMPS is needed in the future.