Marco Vito Marino1,2, Antonello Mirabella3, Marcos Gomez Ruiz4, Andrzej Lech Komorowski5. 1. Department of General Surgery, Hospital Universitario Marquès de Valdecilla, Santander, Spain, marco.vito.marino@gmail.com. 2. Department of Emergency and General Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliera Ospedali Riuniti Villa Sofia-Cervello, Palermo, Italy, marco.vito.marino@gmail.com. 3. Department of Emergency and General Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliera Ospedali Riuniti Villa Sofia-Cervello, Palermo, Italy. 4. Department of General Surgery, Hospital Universitario Marquès de Valdecilla, Santander, Spain. 5. Department of Surgical Oncology, Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski, Krakow University, St. Raphael Hospital, Krakow, Poland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has been adopted relatively slowly despite the benefits of minimally invasive approach. The robotic approach can overcome the limitations of LDP, thus increasing the acceptance of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy. METHODS: We performed a 1:1 retrospective case-matched comparison among 2 groups of 35 patients who underwent robotic-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RDP) or LDP from August 2014 to April 2017. RESULTS: The operative time was similar in both groups (230 RDP vs. 205 LDP min, p = 0.382). The robotic group had a lower estimated blood loss (95 vs. 275 mL, p = 0.035). The spleen preservation rate was higher in the RDP group (100 vs. 66.7%, p = 0.027), while the conversion rate to open surgery was higher in the laparoscopic group (14.3 vs. 2.9%, p = 0.048). The overall complication rate was lower in the robotic group (25.7 vs. 37.1%, p = 0.044). There was no statistically significant difference in oncologic outcomes between the groups in terms of R0 resection rate (100% RDP vs. 85% LDP, p = 0.233) and number of harvested lymph nodes (14.4 RDP vs. 10.8 LDP, p = 0.678). CONCLUSIONS: The RDP showed a lower estimated blood loss, conversion, and morbidity rate. It offered a higher spleen preservation rate in comparison to LDP while maintaining comparable oncologic outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has been adopted relatively slowly despite the benefits of minimally invasive approach. The robotic approach can overcome the limitations of LDP, thus increasing the acceptance of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy. METHODS: We performed a 1:1 retrospective case-matched comparison among 2 groups of 35 patients who underwent robotic-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RDP) or LDP from August 2014 to April 2017. RESULTS: The operative time was similar in both groups (230 RDP vs. 205 LDP min, p = 0.382). The robotic group had a lower estimated blood loss (95 vs. 275 mL, p = 0.035). The spleen preservation rate was higher in the RDP group (100 vs. 66.7%, p = 0.027), while the conversion rate to open surgery was higher in the laparoscopic group (14.3 vs. 2.9%, p = 0.048). The overall complication rate was lower in the robotic group (25.7 vs. 37.1%, p = 0.044). There was no statistically significant difference in oncologic outcomes between the groups in terms of R0 resection rate (100% RDP vs. 85% LDP, p = 0.233) and number of harvested lymph nodes (14.4 RDP vs. 10.8 LDP, p = 0.678). CONCLUSIONS: The RDP showed a lower estimated blood loss, conversion, and morbidity rate. It offered a higher spleen preservation rate in comparison to LDP while maintaining comparable oncologic outcomes.
Authors: Marco V Marino; Adrian Kah Heng Chiow; Antonello Mirabella; Gianpaolo Vaccarella; Andrzej L Komorowski Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-05-18 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Madeline Chee; Chuan-Yaw Lee; Ser-Yee Lee; London L P J Ooi; Alexander Y F Chung; Chung-Yip Chan; Brian K P Goh Journal: J Minim Access Surg Date: 2022 Jan-Mar Impact factor: 1.407