1
|
Emmen AMLH, Zwart MJW, Khatkov IE, Boggi U, Groot Koerkamp B, Busch OR, Saint-Marc O, Dokmak S, Molenaar IQ, D'Hondt M, Ramera M, Keck T, Ferrari G, Luyer MDP, Moraldi L, Ielpo B, Wittel U, Souche FR, Hackert T, Lips D, Can MF, Bosscha K, Fara R, Festen S, van Dieren S, Coratti A, De Hingh I, Mazzola M, Wellner U, De Meyere C, van Santvoort HC, Aussilhou B, Ibenkhayat A, de Wilde RF, Kauffmann EF, Tyutyunnik P, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M. Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy: a pan-European multicenter propensity-matched study. Surgery 2024:S0039-6060(24)00078-3. [PMID: 38570225 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2024.02.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2023] [Revised: 01/30/2024] [Accepted: 02/14/2024] [Indexed: 04/05/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The use of robot-assisted and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy is increasing, yet large adjusted analyses that can be generalized internationally are lacking. This study aimed to compare outcomes after robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy in a pan-European cohort. METHODS An international multicenter retrospective study including patients after robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy from 50 centers in 12 European countries (2009-2020). Propensity score matching was performed in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo ≥III). RESULTS Among 2,082 patients undergoing minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy, 1,006 underwent robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and 1,076 laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy. After matching 812 versus 812 patients, the rates of major morbidity (31.9% vs 29.6%; P = .347) and 30-day/in-hospital mortality (4.3% vs 4.6%; P = .904) did not differ significantly between robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy, respectively. Robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with a lower conversion rate (6.7% vs 18.0%; P < .001) and higher lymph node retrieval (16 vs 14; P = .003). Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with shorter operation time (446 minutes versus 400 minutes; P < .001), and lower rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B/C (19.0% vs 11.7%; P < .001), delayed gastric emptying grade B/C (21.4% vs 7.4%; P < .001), and a higher R0-resection rate (73.2% vs 84.4%; P < .001). CONCLUSION This European multicenter study found no differences in overall major morbidity and 30-day/in-hospital mortality after robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy compared with laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy. Further, laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with a lower rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, wound infection, shorter length of stay, and a higher R0 resection rate than robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy. In contrast, robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with a lower conversion rate and a higher number of retrieved lymph nodes as compared with laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anouk M L H Emmen
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy; Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands. http://www.twitter.com/AnoukEmmen
| | - Maurice J W Zwart
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands. http://www.twitter.com/mauricezwart
| | - Igor E Khatkov
- Department of Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center, Russia
| | - Ugo Boggi
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Italy
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier Saint-Marc
- Service de Chirurgie Digestive, Endocrinienne et Thoracique, Center Hospitalier Universitaire Orleans, France
| | - Safi Dokmak
- Department of HPB surgery and liver transplantation, Beaujon Hospital, Clichy, France. University Paris Cité
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital and University Medical Center, the Netherlands
| | - Mathieu D'Hondt
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - Marco Ramera
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Tobias Keck
- Clinic for Surgery, University of Schleswig-Holstein Campus Lübeck, Germany
| | - Giovanni Ferrari
- Department of Oncological and Minimally Invasive Surgery, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | - Misha D P Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Luca Moraldi
- Department of Oncology and Robotic Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - Benedetto Ielpo
- Department of Surgery, HPB unit, University Mar Hospital, Parc Salut, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Uwe Wittel
- Department of Surgery, University of Freiburg, Germany
| | - Francois-Regis Souche
- Department de Chirurgie Digestive (A), Mini-invasive et Oncologigue, Hôspital Saint-Eloi, Montpellier, France
| | - Thilo Hackert
- Dept. of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany
| | - Daan Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | | | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Ziekenhuis, s-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - Regis Fara
- Department of Surgery, Hôpital Européen Marseille, France
| | | | - Susan van Dieren
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Andrea Coratti
- Department of Oncology and Robotic Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - Ignace De Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Michele Mazzola
- Department of Oncological and Minimally Invasive Surgery, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | - Ulrich Wellner
- Clinic for Surgery, University of Schleswig-Holstein Campus Lübeck, Germany
| | - Celine De Meyere
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital and University Medical Center, the Netherlands
| | - Béatrice Aussilhou
- Department of HPB surgery and liver transplantation, Beaujon Hospital, Clichy, France. University Paris Cité
| | - Abdallah Ibenkhayat
- Service de Chirurgie Digestive, Endocrinienne et Thoracique, Center Hospitalier Universitaire Orleans, France
| | - Roeland F de Wilde
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Pavel Tyutyunnik
- Department of Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center, Russia
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Mohammad Abu Hilal
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
de Graaf N, Zwart MJW, van Hilst J, van den Broek B, Bonsing BA, Busch OR, Coene PPLO, Daams F, van Dieren S, van Eijck CHJ, Festen S, de Hingh IHJT, Lips DJ, Luyer MDP, Mieog JSD, van Santvoort HC, van der Schelling GP, Stommel MWJ, de Wilde RF, Molenaar IQ, Groot Koerkamp B, Besselink MG. Early experience with robotic pancreatoduodenectomy versus open pancreatoduodenectomy: nationwide propensity-score-matched analysis. Br J Surg 2024; 111:znae043. [PMID: 38415878 PMCID: PMC10898866 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znae043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2023] [Revised: 01/17/2024] [Accepted: 01/31/2024] [Indexed: 02/29/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although robotic pancreatoduodenectomy has shown promising outcomes in experienced high-volume centres, it is unclear whether implementation on a nationwide scale is safe and beneficial. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of the early experience with robotic pancreatoduodenectomy versus open pancreatoduodenectomy in the Netherlands. METHODS This was a nationwide retrospective cohort study of all consecutive patients who underwent robotic pancreatoduodenectomy or open pancreatoduodenectomy who were registered in the mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (18 centres, 2014-2021), starting from the first robotic pancreatoduodenectomy procedure per centre. The main endpoints were major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade greater than or equal to III) and in-hospital/30-day mortality. Propensity-score matching (1 : 1) was used to minimize selection bias. RESULTS Overall, 701 patients who underwent robotic pancreatoduodenectomy and 4447 patients who underwent open pancreatoduodenectomy were included. Among the eight centres that performed robotic pancreatoduodenectomy, the median robotic pancreatoduodenectomy experience was 86 (range 48-149), with a 7.3% conversion rate. After matching (698 robotic pancreatoduodenectomy patients versus 698 open pancreatoduodenectomy control patients), no significant differences were found in major complications (40.3% versus 36.2% respectively; P = 0.186), in-hospital/30-day mortality (4.0% versus 3.1% respectively; P = 0.326), and postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B/C (24.9% versus 23.5% respectively; P = 0.578). Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with a longer operating time (359 min versus 301 min; P < 0.001), less intraoperative blood loss (200 ml versus 500 ml; P < 0.001), fewer wound infections (7.4% versus 12.2%; P = 0.008), and a shorter hospital stay (11 days versus 12 days; P < 0.001). Centres performing greater than or equal to 20 robotic pancreatoduodenectomies annually had a lower mortality rate (2.9% versus 7.3%; P = 0.009) and a lower conversion rate (6.3% versus 11.2%; P = 0.032). CONCLUSION This study indicates that robotic pancreatoduodenectomy was safely implemented nationwide, without significant differences in major morbidity and mortality compared with matched open pancreatoduodenectomy patients. Randomized trials should be carried out to verify these findings and confirm the observed benefits of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy versus open pancreatoduodenectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nine de Graaf
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of General Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | - Maurice J W Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bram van den Broek
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Freek Daams
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Susan van Dieren
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Epidemiologist Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Misha D P Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - J Sven D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Deptartment of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Roeland F de Wilde
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Chen JW, Lof S, Zwart MJW, Busch OR, Daams F, Festen S, Fong ZV, Hogg ME, Slooter MD, Nieveen van Dijkum EJ, Besselink MG. Intraoperative Fluorescence Imaging During Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomy to Detect Suture-Induced Hypoperfusion of the Pancreatic Stump as a Predictor of Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula (FLUOPAN): Prospective Proof-of-concept Study. Ann Surg Open 2023; 4:e354. [PMID: 38144496 PMCID: PMC10735109 DOI: 10.1097/as9.0000000000000354] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2023] [Accepted: 09/28/2023] [Indexed: 12/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Background A potential downside of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) is the lack of tactile feedback when tying sutures, which could be especially perilous during pancreatic anastomosis. Near-infrared fluorescence imaging with indocyanine green (NIRF-ICG) could detect transpancreatic-suture-induced hypoperfusion of the pancreatic stump during RPD, which may be related to postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) grade B/C, but studies are lacking. Methods This prospective study included 37 patients undergoing RPD to assess the relation between pancreatic stump hypoperfusion as objectified with NIRF-ICG using Firefly and the rate of POPF grade B/C. In 27 patients, NIRF-ICG was performed after tying down the transpancreatic U-sutures. In 10 'negative control' patients, NIRF-ICG was performed before tying these sutures. Results Pancreatic stump hypoperfusion was detected using NIRF-ICG in 9/27 patients (33%) during RPD. Hypoperfusion was associated with POPF grade B/C (67% [6/9 patients] versus 17% [3/18 patients], P = 0.026). No hypoperfusion was objectified in 10 'negative controls'. Conclusions Transpancreatic-suture-induced pancreatic stump hypoperfusion can be detected using NIRF-ICG during RPD and was associated with POPF grade B/C. Surgeons could use NIRF-ICG to adapt their suturing approach during robotic pancreatico-jejunostomy. Further larger prospective studies are needed to validate the association between transpancreatic-suture-induced hypoperfusion and POPF.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeffrey W. Chen
- From the Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of life, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sanne Lof
- From the Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of life, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Maurice J. W. Zwart
- From the Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of life, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Olivier R. Busch
- From the Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of life, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Freek Daams
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of life, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sebastiaan Festen
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Location Oost, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Zhi Ven Fong
- Division of Surgical Oncology and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ
| | - Melissa E. Hogg
- Department of Surgery, Northshore University HealthSystem, Chicago, IL
| | - Maxime D. Slooter
- From the Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of life, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Els J.M. Nieveen van Dijkum
- From the Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of life, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G. Besselink
- From the Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of life, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Zwart MJW, Nota CLM, de Rooij T, van Hilst J, Te Riele WW, van Santvoort HC, Hagendoorn J, Borei Rinkes IHM, van Dam JL, Latenstein AEJ, Takagi K, Tran KTC, Schreinemakers J, van der Schelling GP, Wijsman JH, Festen S, Daams F, Luyer MD, de Hingh IHJT, Mieog JSD, Bonsing BA, Lips DJ, Hilal MA, Busch OR, Saint-Marc O, Zehl HJ, Zureikat AH, Hogg ME, Molenaar IQ, Besselink MG, Koerkamp BG. Outcomes of a Multicenter Training Program in Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomy (LAELAPS-3). Ann Surg 2022; 276:e886-e895. [PMID: 33534227 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000004783] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 22.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess feasibility and safety of a multicenter training program in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) adhering to the IDEAL framework for implementation of surgical innovation. BACKGROUND Good results for RPD have been reported from single center studies. However, data on feasibility and safety of implementation through a multicenter training program in RPD are lacking. METHODS A multicenter training program in RPD was designed together with the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, including an online video bank, robot simulation exercises, biotissue drills, and on-site proctoring. Benchmark patients were based on the criteria of Clavien. Outcomes were collected prospectively (March 2016-October 2019). Cumulative sum analysis of operative time was performed to distinguish the first and second phase of the learning curve. Outcomes were compared between both phases of the learning curve. Trends in nationwide use of robotic and laparoscopic PD were assessed in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. RESULTS Overall, 275 RPD procedures were performed in seven centers by 15 trained surgeons. The recent benchmark criteria for low-risk PD were met by 125 (45.5%) patients. The conversion rate was 6.5% (n = 18) and median blood loss 250ml [interquartile range (IQR) 150-500]. The rate of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complications was 44.4% (n = 122), postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B/C) rate 23.6% (n = 65), 90-day complication-related mortality 2.5% (n = 7) and 90-day cancer-related mortality 2.2.% (n = 6). Median postoperative hospital stay was 12 days (IQR 8-20). In the subgroup of patients with pancreatic cancer (n = 80), the major complication rate was 31.3% and POPF rate was 10%. Cumulative sum analysis for operative time found a learning curve inflection point at 22 RPDs (IQR 10-35) with similar rates of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complications in the first and second phase (43.4% vs 43.8%, P = 0.956, respectively). During the study period the nationwide use of laparoscopic PD reduced from 15% to 1%, whereas the use of RPD increased from 0% to 25%. CONCLUSIONS This multicenter RPD training program in centers with sufficient surgical volume was found to be feasible without a negative impact of the learning curve on clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maurice J W Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Carolijn L M Nota
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Inne H M Borei Rinkes
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Jacob L van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Anouk E J Latenstein
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Kosei Takagi
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Khé T C Tran
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Jan H Wijsman
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Ziekenhuis, Breda, the Netherlands
| | | | - Freek Daams
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Misha D Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Jan S D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
- Department of Surgery, Istituto Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier Saint-Marc
- Department of Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Regional Orleans, Orleans, France
| | - Herbert J Zehl
- Department of Surgery, University of Texas, Southwestern, Dallas, Texas
| | - Amer H Zureikat
- Department of Surgery, Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Melissa E Hogg
- Department of Surgery, Northshore University HealthSystem, Chicago, Illinois
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Zwart MJW, Jones LR, Hogg ME, Tol JAMG, Abu Hilal M, Daams F, Festen S, Busch OR, Besselink MG. Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Head Cancer: a Case Report of a Standardized Technique. J Vis Exp 2022. [PMID: 35815992 DOI: 10.3791/62863] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) for pancreatic cancer is a challenging procedure. Aberrant vasculature may increase the technical difficulty. Several studies have described the safety of RPD in case of a replaced or aberrant right hepatic artery, but detailed video descriptions of the approach are lacking. This case report describes a step--by--step technical video in case of a replaced right hepatic artery. A 58-year-old woman presented with an incidental finding of a 1.7 cm pancreatic head mass. RPD was performed using the da Vinci Xi system and involves a robotic-assisted pancreatico- and hepatico-jejunostomy and open gastro-jejunostomy at the specimen extraction site. The operation time was 410 min with 220 mL of blood loss. The patient had an uncomplicated postoperative course and was discharged after 5 days. Pathology revealed a pancreatic head cancer. RPD is a feasible and safe procedure in case of a replaced hepatic artery when performed in selected patients in high-volume centers by experienced surgeons.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maurice J W Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Leia R Jones
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza
| | - Melissa E Hogg
- Department of Surgery, Northshore University Health System
| | - Johanna A M G Tol
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Mohammad Abu Hilal
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza
| | - Freek Daams
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Cancer Center Amsterdam
| | | | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands;
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Zwart MJW, Görgec B, Arabiyat A, Nota CLM, van der Poel MJ, Fichtinger RS, Berrevoet F, van Dam RM, Aldrighetti L, Fuks D, Hoti E, Edwin B, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M, Hagendoorn J, Swijnenburg RJ. Pan-European survey on the implementation of robotic and laparoscopic minimally invasive liver surgery. HPB (Oxford) 2022; 24:322-331. [PMID: 34772622 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.08.939] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2021] [Revised: 07/29/2021] [Accepted: 08/06/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic and robotic minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is gaining popularity. Recent data and views on the implementation of laparoscopic and robotic MILS throughout Europe are lacking. METHODS An anonymous survey consisting of 46 questions was sent to all members of the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association. RESULTS The survey was completed by 120 surgeons from 103 centers in 24 countries. Median annual center volume of liver resection was 100 [IQR 50-140]. The median annual volume of MILS per center was 30 [IQR 16-40]. For minor resections, laparoscopic MILS was used by 80 (67%) surgeons and robotic MILS by 35 (29%) surgeons. For major resections, laparoscopic MILS was used by 74 (62%) surgeons and robotic MILS by 33 (28%) surgeons. The majority of the surgeons stated that minimum annual volume of MILS per center should be around 21-30 procedures/year. Of the surgeons performing robotic surgery, 28 (70%) felt they missed specific equipment, such as a robotic-CUSA. Seventy (66%) surgeons provided a formal MILS training to residents and fellows. In 5 years' time, 106 (88%) surgeons felt that MILS would have superior value as compared to open liver surgery. CONCLUSION In the participating European liver centers, MILS comprised about one third of all liver resections and is expected to increase further. Laparoscopic MILS is still twice as common as robotic MILS. Development of specific instruments for robotic liver parenchymal transection might further increase its adoption.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maurice J W Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Burak Görgec
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Istituto Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Abdullah Arabiyat
- Department of Surgery, The Royal Lancaster Infirmary, University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay, United Kingdom
| | - Carolijn L M Nota
- Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center/Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Marcel J van der Poel
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Robert S Fichtinger
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Frederik Berrevoet
- Department of General and HPB Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Luca Aldrighetti
- Department of Surgery, Hepatobiliary Surgery Unit, San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - David Fuks
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France
| | - Emir Hoti
- Department of Surgery, Saint Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Bjørn Edwin
- Interventional Centre and Department of Hepato-pancreato-biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital and Institute for Medicine, University in Oslo, Norway
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Istituto Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy.
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center/Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Zwart MJW, Jones LR, Fuente I, Balduzzi A, Takagi K, Novak S, Stibbe LA, de Rooij T, van Hilst J, van Rijssen LB, van Dieren S, Vanlander A, van den Boezem PB, Daams F, Mieog JSD, Bonsing BA, Rosman C, Festen S, Luyer MD, Lips DJ, Moser AJ, Busch OR, Abu Hilal M, Hogg ME, Stommel MWJ, Besselink MG. Performance with robotic surgery versus 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy during pancreatic and biliary anastomoses in a biotissue model: pooled analysis of two randomized trials. Surg Endosc 2022; 36:4518-4528. [PMID: 34799744 PMCID: PMC9085660 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08805-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2021] [Accepted: 10/17/2021] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Robotic surgery may improve surgical performance during minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy as compared to 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy but comparative studies are lacking. This study assessed the impact of robotic surgery versus 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy on surgical performance and operative time using a standardized biotissue model for pancreatico- and hepatico-jejunostomy using pooled data from two randomized controlled crossover trials (RCTs). METHODS Pooled analysis of data from two RCTs with 60 participants (36 surgeons, 24 residents) from 11 countries (December 2017-July 2019) was conducted. Each included participant completed two pancreatico- and two hepatico-jejunostomies in biotissue using 3D-robotic surgery, 3D-laparoscopy, or 2D-laparoscopy. Primary outcomes were the objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS: 12-60) rating, scored by observers blinded for 3D/2D and the operative time required to complete both anastomoses. Sensitivity analysis excluded participants with excess experience compared to others. RESULTS A total of 220 anastomoses were completed (robotic 80, 3D-laparoscopy 70, 2D-laparoscopy 70). Participants in the robotic group had less surgical experience [median 1 (0-2) versus 6 years (4-12), p < 0.001], as compared to the laparoscopic group. Robotic surgery resulted in higher OSATS ratings (50, 43, 39 points, p = .021 and p < .001) and shorter operative time (56.5, 65.0, 81.5 min, p = .055 and p < .001), as compared to 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy, respectively, which remained in the sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION In a pooled analysis of two RCTs in a biotissue model, robotic surgery resulted in better surgical performance scores and shorter operative time for biotissue pancreatic and biliary anastomoses, as compared to 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maurice J. W. Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Leia R. Jones
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.415090.90000 0004 1763 5424Department of General Surgery, Instituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Ignacio Fuente
- grid.414775.40000 0001 2319 4408Department of Surgery, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Alberto Balduzzi
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XGeneral and Pancreatic Surgery Department, Pancreas Institute, University and Hospital Trust of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Kosei Takagi
- grid.5645.2000000040459992XDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.261356.50000 0001 1302 4472Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Transplant, and Surgical Oncology, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan
| | - Stephanie Novak
- grid.412689.00000 0001 0650 7433Department of Surgery, Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA USA
| | - Luna A. Stibbe
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - L. Bengt van Rijssen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Susan van Dieren
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Aude Vanlander
- grid.5342.00000 0001 2069 7798Department of Surgery, University Hospital Ghent, University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Peter B. van den Boezem
- grid.10417.330000 0004 0444 9382Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Freek Daams
- grid.12380.380000 0004 1754 9227Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, VU University, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J. Sven D. Mieog
- grid.10419.3d0000000089452978Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A. Bonsing
- grid.10419.3d0000000089452978Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Camiel Rosman
- grid.10417.330000 0004 0444 9382Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Sebastiaan Festen
- grid.440209.b0000 0004 0501 8269Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Misha D. Luyer
- grid.413532.20000 0004 0398 8384Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Daan J. Lips
- grid.415214.70000 0004 0399 8347Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Arthur J. Moser
- grid.38142.3c000000041936754XDepartment of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA USA
| | - Olivier R. Busch
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mohammad Abu Hilal
- grid.415090.90000 0004 1763 5424Department of General Surgery, Instituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Melissa E. Hogg
- grid.240372.00000 0004 0400 4439Department of Surgery, Northshore University Health System, Chicago, IL USA
| | - Martijn W. J. Stommel
- grid.10417.330000 0004 0444 9382Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G. Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Jones LR, Zwart MJW, Molenaar IQ, Koerkamp BG, Hogg ME, Hilal MA, Besselink MG. Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomy: Patient Selection, Volume Criteria, and Training Programs. Scand J Surg 2021; 109:29-33. [PMID: 32192422 DOI: 10.1177/1457496920911815] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION There has been a rapid development in minimally invasive pancreas surgery in recent years. The most recent innovation is robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. Several studies have suggested benefits as compared to the open or laparoscopic approach. This review provides an overview of studies concerning patient selection, volume criteria, and training programs for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy and identified knowledge gaps regarding barriers for safe implementation of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS A Pubmed search was conducted concerning patient selection, volume criteria, and training programs in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. RESULTS A total of 20 studies were included. No contraindications were found in patient selection for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. The consensus and the Miami guidelines advice is a minimum annual volume of 20 robotic pancreatoduodenectomy procedures per center, per year. One training program was identified which describes superior outcomes after the training program and shortening of the learning curve in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. CONCLUSION Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy is safe and feasable for all indications when performed by specifically trained surgeons working in centers who can maintain a minimum volume of 20 robotic pancreatoduodenectomy procedures per year. Large proficiency-based training program for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy seem essential to facilitate a safe implementation and future research on robotic pancreatoduodenectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L R Jones
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy.,Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M J W Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I Q Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - B Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M E Hogg
- Department of Surgery, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - M A Hilal
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Vissers FL, Zwart MJW, Balduzzi A, Korrel M, Lof S, Abu Hilal M, Besselink MG. Laparoscopic Radical Left Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Cancer: Surgical Strategy and Technique Video. J Vis Exp 2020. [PMID: 32568220 DOI: 10.3791/60332] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Radical resection margins, resection of Gerota's (perirenal) fascia, and adequate lymph node dissection are crucial for an adequate oncological resection of left-sided pancreatic cancer. Several surgical techniques have been described in recent years, but few were specifically designed for minimally invasive approaches. This study describes and demonstrates a standardized and reproducible technique for an adequate oncological resection of pancreatic cancer: laparoscopic radical left pancreatectomy (LRLP). A 61-year-old woman presented with an incidental finding of a 3 cm mass in the left pancreas suspect for malignancy. Imaging did not reveal distant metastases, central vascular involvement, or morbid obesity, hence the patient was suitable for LRLP. This study describes the main steps of LRLP for pancreatic cancer. First, the lesser sac is opened by transecting the gastrocolic ligament. The splenic flexure of the colon is mobilized and the inferior border of the pancreas including Gerota's fascia is dissected down to the inferior border of the spleen. The pancreas is tunneled and hung, including Gerota's fascia with a vessel loop. At the pancreatic neck, a tunnel is created between the pancreas and the portal vein, likewise a vessel loop is passed. The pancreas is then transected using the graded compression technique with an endostapler. Both the splenic vein and artery are transected before completing the resection. The entire specimen is extracted in a retrieval bag via a small Pfannenstiel incision. Duration of the surgery was 210 min with 250 mL blood loss. Pathology revealed a R0-resection (>1 mm) of a well-to-moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma originating from an intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm. A total of 15 tumor-negative lymph nodes were resected. This is a detailed description of LRLP for left-sided pancreatic cancer as is currently being used within the international, multicenter randomized DIPLOMA (Distal Pancreatectomy Minimally Invasive or Open for PDAC) trial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frederique L Vissers
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam
| | - Maurice J W Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam
| | - Alberto Balduzzi
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam; General and Pancreatic Surgery Department, Pancreas Institute, University and Hospital Trust of Verona
| | - Maarten Korrel
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam
| | - Sanne Lof
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
| | - Mohammad Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam;
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Kaçmaz E, Zwart MJW, Engelsman AF, Busch OR, Nieveen van Dijkum EJM, Besselink MG. Robotic Enucleation of an Intra-Pancreatic Insulinoma in the Pancreatic Head. J Vis Exp 2020. [PMID: 31957744 DOI: 10.3791/60290] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Pancreatic parenchyma sparing surgery for insulinomas avoids the risk of endocrine and exocrine insufficiency, and potential high-risk anastomoses associated with pancreatic resection. Robotic surgery may be used as an alternative for open pancreatic enucleation without compromising dexterity and 3D-vision. We present the case of a 42-year old woman who presented with sweating, tremor and episodes of hypoglycemia. A fasting test confirmed endogenic insulin overproduction. After inconclusive CT- and MRI imaging, endoscopic ultrasonography showed a hypoechoic lesion, which was fully within the pancreatic head. Although consent was obtained for pancreatoduodenectomy, robotic enucleation seemed feasible. After mobilization, intraoperative ultrasonography was used to identify the lesion and its relation with the pancreatic duct. Dissection was performed using a traction suture, hot shears and bipolar diathermia. A sealant patch was applied for hemostasis and a drain placed. The patient developed a grade B pancreatic fistula for which endoscopic sphincterotomy was performed; the surgical drain could be removed in the outpatient clinic after 20 days. Prospective studies should confirm the short- and long-term benefits of robotic enucleation of insulinomas.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Kaçmaz
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam
| | - M J W Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam
| | - A F Engelsman
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam; ENETS Center of Excellence, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam
| | - O R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam
| | - E J M Nieveen van Dijkum
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam; ENETS Center of Excellence, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam;
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Balduzzi A, Zwart MJW, Kempeneers RMA, Boermeester MA, Busch OR, Besselink MG. Robotic Lateral Pancreaticojejunostomy for Chronic Pancreatitis. J Vis Exp 2019. [PMID: 31885388 DOI: 10.3791/60301] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Lateral pancreaticojejunostomy (LPJ) has shown good postoperative outcomes in patients with painful, morphine dependent, chronic pancreatitis (CP). The recent rise of robotic and laparoscopic pancreatic surgery has found benefits such as reduced time to functional recovery. Few studies have reported on the feasibility, technique and outcome of robotic LPJ, especially including transection of the gastroduodenal artery. The present study describes the main steps for robotic LPJ in a patient with painful chronic pancreatitis with a dilated main pancreatic duct. The patient underwent robotic LPJ. The LPJ anastomosis is performed using a running suture technique in a longitudinal side-to-side manner. Routinely, the gastroduodenal artery is transected to drain the entire length of the main pancreatic duct. The patient is in French position; 7 trocars are placed (4 robotic, 2 laparoscopic assistants, 1 liver-retractor). After docking of the robot system, the omental bursa is opened, and the right gastroepiploic artery and vein are ligated at their base at the lower border of the pancreas. Intraoperative ultrasonography is performed in order to determine trajectory of the dilated main pancreatic duct which is opened for its entire length after the gastroduodenal artery has been suture ligated both cranially and caudally from the main pancreatic duct. A Roux limb is created, and a latero-lateral PJ is fashioned using several 3-0 barbed sutures. A stapled jejuno-jejunostomy is created at sufficient distance from the pancreatic anastomosis, aided by a 50 cm suture. The described technique for robotic LPJ is a complex but feasible operation for patients with treatment refractory CP and a dilated main pancreatic duct. Due to its complexity, implementation in high volume centers with extensive experience with CP surgery may improve outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alberto Balduzzi
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam; General and Pancreatic Surgery Department, Pancreas Institute, University and Hospital Trust of Verona
| | - Maurice J W Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam
| | - Rens M A Kempeneers
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam
| | - Marja A Boermeester
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam;
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Zwart MJW, Fuente I, Hilst J, de Rooij T, van Dieren S, van Rijssen LB, Schijven MP, Busch ORC, Luyer MD, Lips DJ, Festen S, Abu Hilal M, Besselink MG. Added value of 3D-vision during laparoscopic biotissue pancreatico- and hepaticojejunostomy (LAELAPS 3D2D): an international randomized cross-over trial. HPB (Oxford) 2019; 21:1087-1094. [PMID: 31080087 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2019.04.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/13/2019] [Revised: 04/05/2019] [Accepted: 04/12/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND It is currently unclear what the added value is of 3D-laparoscopy during pancreatic and biliary surgery. 3D-laparoscopy could improve procedure time and/or surgical performance, for instance in demanding anastomoses such as pancreatico- and hepaticojejunostomy. The impact of 3D-laparoscopy could be negligible in more experienced surgeons. METHODS We conducted a randomized controlled cross-over trial including 20 expert laparoscopic surgeons and 20 surgical residents from 9 countries (Argentina, Estonia, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, South Africa, Spain, UK, USA). All participants performed a pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) and a hepaticojejunostomy (HJ) using 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy on biotissue organ models according to the Pittsburgh method. Primary endpoint was the time required to complete both anastomoses. Secondary endpoint was the objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS; range 12-60) rating. Observers were blinded for 3D/2D and expertise. RESULTS A total of 40 participants completed 144 PJs and HJs. 3D-laparoscopy reduced the operative time with 15.5 min (95%CI 10.2-24.5 min), from 81.0 to 64.4 min, p = 0.001. This reduction was observed for both experts and residents (13.0 vs 22.2 min, intergroup significance p = 0.354). The OSATS improved with 5.1 points, SD ± 6.3, with 3D-laparoscopy, p = 0.001. This improvement was observed for both experts and residents (4.6 vs 5.6 points, p = 0.519). Of all participants, 37/39 participants stated to prefer 3D laparoscopy whereas 14/39 reported side effects. Minor side effects were reported by 10/39 participants whereas 2/39 participants reported severe side effects (both severe eye strain). CONCLUSION 3D-laparoscopy, as compared to 2D-laparoscopy, reduced the operative time and improved surgical performance for PJ and HJ anastomoses in both experts and residents with mostly minor side effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maurice J W Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Ignacio Fuente
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires Hospital, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Jony Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Susan van Dieren
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lennart B van Rijssen
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marlies P Schijven
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier R C Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Misha D Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|