Literature DB >> 29117639

Comparison of surgical outcomes between open and robot-assisted minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Hyeong Seok Kim1, Youngmin Han1, Jae Seung Kang1, Hongbeom Kim2, Jae Ri Kim1, Wooil Kwon1, Sun-Whe Kim1, Jin-Young Jang1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Robot surgery is a new method that maintains advantages and overcomes disadvantages of conventional methods, even in pancreatic surgery. This study aimed to evaluate safety and benefits of robot-assisted minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (robot PD).
METHODS: This study included 237 patients who underwent PD between 2015 and 2017. Demographics and surgical outcomes were evaluated.
RESULTS: Fifty-one patients underwent robot PD and 186 underwent open PD. Robot PD group had younger age (60.7 vs. 65.4 years, P = 0.006) and lower body mass index (22.7 vs. 24.0, P = 0.007). Robot PD group had lower proportion of patients with firm or hard pancreatic texture (15.7% vs. 38.2%, P = 0.004) and smaller pancreatic duct size (2.3 vs. 3.3 mm, P = 0.002). Two groups had similar operation time (robot vs. open: 335.6 vs. 330.1 min) and complications (15.7% vs. 21.0%), including postoperative pancreatic fistula rate (6.0% vs. 12.0%). Robot PD group had lower postoperative pain score (3.7 vs. 4.1 points, P = 0.008), and shorter postoperative stay (10.6 vs. 15.3 days, P = 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Robot PD is comparable to open PD in early outcomes. Robot PD is safe and feasible and enables early recovery; indication for robot PD is expected to expand in the near future.
© 2017 Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Minimally invasive surgery; Pancreatic fistula; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Postoperative complications; Propensity scores; Robotics

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29117639     DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.522

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci        ISSN: 1868-6974            Impact factor:   7.027


  16 in total

1.  Robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a meta-analysis of short-term outcomes.

Authors:  Qing Yan; Lei-Bo Xu; Ze-Fang Ren; Chao Liu
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-12-17       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  International consensus statement on robotic pancreatic surgery.

Authors:  Rong Liu; Go Wakabayashi; Chinnusamy Palanivelu; Allan Tsung; Kehu Yang; Brian K P Goh; Charing Ching-Ning Chong; Chang Moo Kang; Chenghong Peng; Eli Kakiashvili; Ho-Seong Han; Hong-Jin Kim; Jin He; Jae Hoon Lee; Kyoichi Takaori; Marco Vito Marino; Shen-Nien Wang; Tiankang Guo; Thilo Hackert; Ting-Shuo Huang; Yiengpruksawan Anusak; Yuman Fong; Yuichi Nagakawa; Yi-Ming Shyr; Yao-Ming Wu; Yupei Zhao
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 7.293

3.  Robotic-assisted versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for patients with benign and malignant periampullary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes.

Authors:  Mauro Podda; Chiara Gerardi; Salomone Di Saverio; Marco Vito Marino; R Justin Davies; Gianluca Pellino; Adolfo Pisanu
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-02-18       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy: trends in technique and training challenges.

Authors:  Catherine H Davis; Miral S Grandhi; Victor P Gazivoda; Alissa Greenbaum; Timothy J Kennedy; Russell C Langan; H Richard Alexander; Henry A Pitt; David A August
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-08-04       Impact factor: 3.453

5.  Which one is better? Laparoscopic versus robotic reconstruction in the remnant soft pancreas with a small pancreatic duct following pancreaticoduodenectomy: a multicenter study with propensity score matching analysis.

Authors:  Jae Young Jang; Chang Moo Kang; Hyeyeon Kim; Munseok Choi; Jae Hoon Lee; Sung Hoon Choi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-09-12       Impact factor: 3.453

6.  Robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy with the da Vinci Xi: can the costs of advanced technology be offset by clinical advantages? A case-matched cost analysis versus open approach.

Authors:  Gregorio Di Franco; Valentina Lorenzoni; Matteo Palmeri; Niccolò Furbetta; Simone Guadagni; Desirée Gianardi; Matteo Bianchini; Luca Emanuele Pollina; Franca Melfi; Domenica Mamone; Carlo Milli; Giulio Di Candio; Giuseppe Turchetti; Luca Morelli
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2021-10-27       Impact factor: 3.453

7.  Oncological outcomes of robotic-assisted versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Authors:  Yuanchi Weng; Yu Jiang; Ningzhen Fu; Jiabin Jin; Yusheng Shi; Zhen Huo; Xiaxing Deng; Chenghong Peng; Baiyong Shen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-07-21       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy is associated with lower morbidity compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and high-quality nonrandomized studies.

Authors:  Jia-Fei Yan; Yu Pan; Ke Chen; He-Pan Zhu; Qi-Long Chen
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 1.817

9.  Effectiveness and stability of robot-assisted anastomosis in minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Sung Eun Park; Ho Joong Choi; Young Kyoung You; Tae Ho Hong
Journal:  Ann Surg Treat Res       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 1.859

10.  Outcome of robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy during initial learning curve versus laparotomy.

Authors:  Jiangjiao Zhou; Li Xiong; Xiongying Miao; Juan Liu; Heng Zou; Yu Wen
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-06-15       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.