Expanding the utility of robotics for pancreaticoduodenectomy: a 10-year review and comparison to international benchmarks in pancreatic surgery

被引:5
作者
McCarron, Frances N. [1 ,5 ]
Yoshino, Osamu [1 ]
Muller, Philip C. [2 ]
Wang, Huaping [3 ]
Wang, Yifan [4 ]
Ricker, Ansley [1 ]
Mantha, Rohit [1 ]
Driedger, Michael [1 ]
Beckman, Michael [1 ]
Clavien, Pierre-Alain [2 ]
Vrochides, Dionisios [1 ]
Martinie, John B. [1 ]
机构
[1] Atrium Hlth, Div HPB Surg, Dept Surg, Carolinas Med Ctr, Charlotte, NC 28203 USA
[2] Univ Hosp Zurich, Dept Surg, Swiss HPB & Transplantat Ctr, Zurich, Switzerland
[3] Wake Forest Ctr Biomed Informat, Dept Surg, Carolinas Ctr Surg Outcomes, Charlotte, NC USA
[4] McGill Univ, Div HPB & Transplantat, Dept Surg, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[5] Carolinas Med Ctr, Dept Surg, Div Hepatobiliary & Pancreas Surg, 1025 Morehead Med Dr,Suite 600, Charlotte, NC 28203 USA
来源
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES | 2023年 / 37卷 / 12期
关键词
Robotics; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Pancreatic surgery; Learning curve; Minimally invasive; Benchmarks;
D O I
10.1007/s00464-023-10426-x
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundRobotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) is an emerging alternative to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). Although RPD offers various theoretical advantages, it is used in less than 10% of all pancreaticoduodenectomies. The aim of this study was to report our 10-year experience and compare RPD outcomes with international benchmarks for OPD.MethodsA retrospective review of a prospectively maintained institutional database was performed of consecutive patients who underwent RPD between January 2011 and December 2021. Patients were categorized into low-risk and high-risk groups according to the selection criteria set by the benchmark study. Their outcomes were compared to the international benchmark cut off values. Outcomes were then evaluated over time to identify improvements in practice and establish a learning curve.ResultsOf 201 RPDs, 36 were low-risk and 165 high-risk patients. Compared to the OPD benchmarks, outcomes of low-risk patients were within the cutoff values. High-risk patients were outside the cutoff for blood transfusions (26% vs. <= 23%), overall complications (78% vs. <= 73%), grade I-II complications (68% vs. <= 62%), and readmissions (22% vs <= 21%). Oncologic outcomes for high-risk patients were within benchmark cutoffs. Cases at the end of the learning curve included more pancreatic cancer (42% from 17%) and fewer low-risk patients (10% from 24%) than those at the beginning. After 41 RPD there was a decline in conversion rates and operative time. Between 95 and 143 cases operative time, transfusion rates, and LOS declined significantly. Complications did not differ over time.ConclusionRPD yields results comparable to the established benchmarks in OPD in both low- and high-risk patients. Along the learning curve, RPD evolved with the inclusion of more high-risk cases while outcomes remained within benchmarks. Addition of a robotic HPB surgery fellowship did not compromise outcomes. These results suggest that RPD may be an option for high-risk patients at specialized centers.
引用
收藏
页码:9591 / 9600
页数:10
相关论文
共 31 条
  • [11] What Is the Value of the Robotic Platform for Major Hepatectomies? Comment
    Hamad, Ahmad
    Eskander, Mariam F.
    Tsung, Allan
    [J]. JAMA SURGERY, 2022, 157 (05) : 445 - 445
  • [12] Robotic hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: lessons learned and predictors for conversion
    Hanna, Erin M.
    Rozario, Nigel
    Rupp, Christopher
    Sindram, David
    Iannitti, David A.
    Martinie, John B.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ROBOTICS AND COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY, 2013, 9 (02) : 152 - 159
  • [13] Perioperative and Oncological Outcomes of Robotic Versus Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Low-Risk Surgical Candidates A Multicenter Propensity Score-Matched Study
    Liu, Qu
    Zhao, Zhiming
    Zhang, Xiuping
    Wang, Wei
    Han, Bing
    Chen, Xiong
    Tan, Xiaodong
    Xu, Shuai
    Zhao, Guodong
    Gao, Yuanxing
    Gan, Qin
    Yuan, Jianlei
    Ma, Yuntao
    Dong, Ye
    Liu, Zhonghua
    Wang, Hailong
    Fan, Fangyong
    Liu, Jianing
    Lau, Wan Yee
    Liu, Rong
    [J]. ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2023, 277 (04) : e864 - e871
  • [14] International consensus statement on robotic pancreatic surgery
    Liu, Rong
    Wakabayashi, Go
    Palanivelu, Chinnusamy
    Tsung, Allan
    Yang, Kehu
    Goh, Brian K. P.
    Chong, Charing Ching-Ning
    Kang, Chang Moo
    Peng, Chenghong
    Kakiashvili, Eli
    Han, Ho-Seong
    Kim, Hong-Jin
    He, Jin
    Lee, Jae Hoon
    Takaori, Kyoichi
    Marino, Marco Vito
    Wang, Shen-Nien
    Guo, Tiankang
    Hackert, Thilo
    Huang, Ting-Shuo
    Anusak, Yiengpruksawan
    Fong, Yuman
    Nagakawa, Yuichi
    Shyr, Yi-Ming
    Wu, Yao-Ming
    Zhao, Yupei
    [J]. HEPATOBILIARY SURGERY AND NUTRITION, 2019, 8 (04) : 345 - 360
  • [15] Muller P C, 2022, Ann Surg Open, V3, pe111, DOI 10.1097/AS9.0000000000000111
  • [16] Robotic Distal Pancreatectomy A Novel Standard of Care? Benchmark Values for Surgical Outcomes From 16 International Expert Centers
    Muller, Philip C.
    Breuer, Eva
    Nickel, Felix
    Zani, Jr Sabino
    Kauffmann, Emanuele
    De Franco, Lorenzo
    Tschuor, Christoph
    Krohn, Paul Suno
    Burgdorf, Stefan K.
    Jonas, Jan Philipp
    Oberkofler, Christian E.
    Petrowsky, Henrik
    Saint-Marc, Olivier
    Seelen, Leonard
    Molenaar, Izaak Quintus
    Wellner, Ulrich
    Keck, Tobias
    Coratti, Andrea
    van Dam, Jacob L.
    de Wilde, Roeland
    Koerkamp, Bas Groot
    Valle, Valentina
    Giulianotti, Pier
    Ghabi, Elie
    Moskal, David
    Lavu, Harish
    Vrochides, Dionisios
    Martinie, John
    Yeo, Charles
    Sanchez-Velazquez, Patricia
    Ielpo, Benedetto
    Ajay, Pranay S.
    Shah, Mihir M.
    Kooby, David A.
    Gao, Song
    Hao, Jihui
    He, Jin
    Boggi, Ugo
    Hackert, Thilo
    Allen, Peter
    Borel-Rinkes, Inne H. M.
    Clavien, Pierre Alain
    [J]. ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2023, 278 (02) : 253 - 259
  • [17] How I Do It: Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy
    Nagarkatti, Sushruta S.
    Sastry, Amit V.
    Vrochides, Dionisios
    Martinie, John B.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY, 2019, 23 (08) : 1672 - 1681
  • [18] Rho SY., 2020, Ann Surg, DOI [10.1016/j.hpb.2020.11.249, DOI 10.1016/J.HPB.2020.11.249]
  • [19] Cost Analysis of Pancreaticoduodenectomy at a High-Volume Robotic Hepatopancreaticobiliary Surgery Program
    Zervos, Emmanuel
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS, 2021, 232 (04) : 469 - 469
  • [20] Benchmarks in Pancreatic Surgery A Novel Tool for Unbiased Outcome Comparisons
    Sanchez-Velazquez, Patricia
    Muller, Xavier
    Malleo, Giuseppe
    Park, Joon-Seong
    Hwang, Ho-Kyoung
    Napoli, Niccolo
    Javed, Ammar A.
    Inoue, Yosuke
    Beghdadi, Nassiba
    Kalisvaart, Marit
    Vigia, Emanuel
    Walsh, Carrie D.
    Lovasik, Brendan
    Busquets, Juli
    Scandavini, Chiara
    Robin, Fabien
    Yoshitomi, Hideyuki
    Mackay, Tara M.
    Busch, Olivier R.
    Hartog, Hermien
    Heinrich, Stefan
    Gleisner, Ana
    Perinel, Julie
    Passeri, Michael
    Lluis, Nuria
    Raptis, Dimitri A.
    Tschuor, Christoph
    Oberkofler, Christian E.
    DeOliveira, Michelle L.
    Petrowsky, Henrik
    Martinie, John
    Asbun, Horacio
    Adham, Mustapha
    Schulick, Richard
    Lang, Hauke
    Koerkamp, Bas Groot
    Besselink, Marc G.
    Han, Ho-Seong
    Miyazaki, Masaru
    Ferrone, Cristina R.
    Fernandez-del Castillo, Carlos
    Lillemoe, Keith D.
    Sulpice, Laurent
    Boudjema, Karim
    Del Chiaro, Marco
    Fabregat, Joan
    Kooby, David A.
    Allen, Peter
    Lavu, Harish
    Yeo, Charles J.
    [J]. ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2019, 270 (02) : 211 - 218