BACKGROUND: This study aims to compare the early perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). METHODS: The clinicopathologic features of 45 consecutive patients who underwent minimally-invasive distal pancreatectomy from 2006 to 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients who met our study criteria were included. Eight patients underwent RDP and 31 had LDP. There were 10 (25.6%) open conversions. Six (15.4%) patients had major (> grade 2) morbidities and there was no in-hospital mortality. There were 14 (35.9%) grade A and 9 (23.1%) grade B pancreatic fistulas. Comparison between RDP and LDP demonstrated no significant difference between the patients' baseline characteristics except there was increased frequency of spleen-preserving pancreatectomies (3 (37.5%) vs 25 (80.6%), P=0.016) and splenic-vessel preservation (5 (62.5%) vs 4 (12.9%), P=0.003) in RDP. Comparison between outcomes demonstrated that RDP was associated with a longer median operation time (452.5 (range, 300-685) vs 245 min (range, 85-430), P=0.001) and increased frequency of the procedure completed purely laparoscopically (8 (100%) vs 18 (58.1%), P=0.025). CONCLUSIONS: RDP can be safely adopted and is equivalent to LDP in most perioperative outcomes. It is also associated with a decreased frequency of the need for hand-assistance laparoscopic surgery or open conversion but needed a longer operation time.
BACKGROUND: This study aims to compare the early perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). METHODS: The clinicopathologic features of 45 consecutive patients who underwent minimally-invasive distal pancreatectomy from 2006 to 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients who met our study criteria were included. Eight patients underwent RDP and 31 had LDP. There were 10 (25.6%) open conversions. Six (15.4%) patients had major (> grade 2) morbidities and there was no in-hospital mortality. There were 14 (35.9%) grade A and 9 (23.1%) grade B pancreatic fistulas. Comparison between RDP and LDP demonstrated no significant difference between the patients' baseline characteristics except there was increased frequency of spleen-preserving pancreatectomies (3 (37.5%) vs 25 (80.6%), P=0.016) and splenic-vessel preservation (5 (62.5%) vs 4 (12.9%), P=0.003) in RDP. Comparison between outcomes demonstrated that RDP was associated with a longer median operation time (452.5 (range, 300-685) vs 245 min (range, 85-430), P=0.001) and increased frequency of the procedure completed purely laparoscopically (8 (100%) vs 18 (58.1%), P=0.025). CONCLUSIONS: RDP can be safely adopted and is equivalent to LDP in most perioperative outcomes. It is also associated with a decreased frequency of the need for hand-assistance laparoscopic surgery or open conversion but needed a longer operation time.
Authors: William B Lyman; Michael Passeri; Amit Sastry; Allyson Cochran; David A Iannitti; Dionisios Vrochides; Erin H Baker; John B Martinie Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2018-11-12 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Bjørn Edwin; Mushegh A Sahakyan; Mohammad Abu Hilal; Marc G Besselink; Marco Braga; Jean-Michel Fabre; Laureano Fernández-Cruz; Brice Gayet; Song Cheol Kim; Igor E Khatkov Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-02-15 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Shi Qing Lee; Tousif Kabir; Ye-Xin Koh; Jin-Yao Teo; Ser-Yee Lee; Juinn-Huar Kam; Peng-Chung Cheow; Prema Raj Jeyaraj; Pierce K H Chow; London L Ooi; Alexander Y F Chung; Chung-Yip Chan; Brian K P Goh Journal: Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg Date: 2020-08-31
Authors: Brian K P Goh; Ser-Yee Lee; Juinn-Huar Kam; Hui Ling Soh; Peng-Chung Cheow; Pierce K H Chow; London L P J Ooi; Alexander Y F Chung; Chung-Yip Chan Journal: J Minim Access Surg Date: 2018 Apr-Jun Impact factor: 1.407