Ibrahim Nassour1, Samer Tohme1, Richard Hoehn1, Mohamed Abdelgadir Adam1, Amer H Zureikat1, Paniccia Alessandro2,3. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. panicciaa2@upmc.edu. 3. Division of Surgical Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Scaife Hall, Suite 497, 3550 Terrace Street, Pittsburgh, PA, 15261, USA. panicciaa2@upmc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Emerging data from multi-institutional and national databases suggest that robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy is safe and feasible for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Nevertheless, there are limited reports evaluating its safety and oncologic efficacy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHOD: This is a retrospective study from the 2010-2016 National Cancer Database comparing the postoperative, pathological and long-term oncologic outcomes between robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: We identified 155 (5%) RPD and 3329 (95%) OPD following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The use of the robot increased from 3 cases in 2010 to 50 cases in 2016. RPD patients were more likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy and to be treated at academic centers. After adjustment, RPD was associated with a higher proportion of adequate lymphadenectomy, receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy, decreased rate of prolonged length of stay, and similar 90-day mortality. There was no difference in median overall survival between RPD and OPD (25.6 months vs. 27.5 months, Log Rank p = 0.879). The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates for RPD were 83%, 36% and 22% and for OPD were 86%, 38% and 22%. After adjustment, the use of robotic surgery was associated with similar overall survival compared to the open approach (HR 1.011, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.776-1.316). CONCLUSIONS: Following neoadjuvant chemotherapy, RPD is associated with similar short- and long-term mortality with the advantage of shorter length of stay, higher proportion of adequate lymphadenectomy and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy.
BACKGROUND: Emerging data from multi-institutional and national databases suggest that robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy is safe and feasible for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Nevertheless, there are limited reports evaluating its safety and oncologic efficacy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHOD: This is a retrospective study from the 2010-2016 National Cancer Database comparing the postoperative, pathological and long-term oncologic outcomes between robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: We identified 155 (5%) RPD and 3329 (95%) OPD following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The use of the robot increased from 3 cases in 2010 to 50 cases in 2016. RPD patients were more likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy and to be treated at academic centers. After adjustment, RPD was associated with a higher proportion of adequate lymphadenectomy, receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy, decreased rate of prolonged length of stay, and similar 90-day mortality. There was no difference in median overall survival between RPD and OPD (25.6 months vs. 27.5 months, Log Rank p = 0.879). The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates for RPD were 83%, 36% and 22% and for OPD were 86%, 38% and 22%. After adjustment, the use of robotic surgery was associated with similar overall survival compared to the open approach (HR 1.011, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.776-1.316). CONCLUSIONS: Following neoadjuvant chemotherapy, RPD is associated with similar short- and long-term mortality with the advantage of shorter length of stay, higher proportion of adequate lymphadenectomy and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy.
Authors: Brett L Ecker; Matthew T McMillan; Horacio J Asbun; Chad G Ball; Claudio Bassi; Joal D Beane; Stephen W Behrman; Adam C Berger; Euan J Dickson; Mark Bloomston; Mark P Callery; John D Christein; Elijah Dixon; Jeffrey A Drebin; Carlos Fernandez-Del Castillo; William E Fisher; Zhi Ven Fong; Ericka Haverick; Robert H Hollis; Michael G House; Steven J Hughes; Nigel B Jamieson; Ammar A Javed; Tara S Kent; Stacy J Kowalsky; John W Kunstman; Giuseppe Malleo; Katherine E Poruk; Ronald R Salem; Carl R Schmidt; Kevin Soares; John A Stauffer; Vicente Valero; Lavanniya K P Velu; Amarra A Watkins; Christopher L Wolfgang; Amer H Zureikat; Charles M Vollmer Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Patricia Sánchez-Velázquez; Xavier Muller; Giuseppe Malleo; Joon-Seong Park; Ho-Kyoung Hwang; Niccolò Napoli; Ammar A Javed; Yosuke Inoue; Nassiba Beghdadi; Marit Kalisvaart; Emanuel Vigia; Carrie D Walsh; Brendan Lovasik; Juli Busquets; Chiara Scandavini; Fabien Robin; Hideyuki Yoshitomi; Tara M Mackay; Olivier R Busch; Hermien Hartog; Stefan Heinrich; Ana Gleisner; Julie Perinel; Michael Passeri; Nuria Lluis; Dimitri A Raptis; Christoph Tschuor; Christian E Oberkofler; Michelle L DeOliveira; Henrik Petrowsky; John Martinie; Horacio Asbun; Mustapha Adham; Richard Schulick; Hauke Lang; Bas Groot Koerkamp; Marc G Besselink; Ho-Seong Han; Masaru Miyazaki; Cristina R Ferrone; Carlos Fernández-Del Castillo; Keith D Lillemoe; Laurent Sulpice; Karim Boudjema; Marco Del Chiaro; Joan Fabregat; David A Kooby; Peter Allen; Harish Lavu; Charles J Yeo; Eduardo Barroso; Keith Roberts; Paolo Muiesan; Alain Sauvanet; Akio Saiura; Christopher L Wolfgang; John L Cameron; Ugo Boggi; Dong-Sup Yoon; Claudio Bassi; Milo A Puhan; Pierre-Alain Clavien Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Quisette P Janssen; Stefan Buettner; Mustafa Suker; Berend R Beumer; Pietro Addeo; Philippe Bachellier; Nathan Bahary; Tanios Bekaii-Saab; Maria A Bali; Marc G Besselink; Brian A Boone; Ian Chau; Stephen Clarke; Mary Dillhoff; Bassel F El-Rayes; Jessica M Frakes; Derek Grose; Peter J Hosein; Nigel B Jamieson; Ammar A Javed; Khurum Khan; Kyu-Pyo Kim; Song Cheol Kim; Sunhee S Kim; Andrew H Ko; Jill Lacy; Georgios A Margonis; Martin D McCarter; Colin J McKay; Eric A Mellon; Sing Yu Moorcraft; Ken-Ichi Okada; Alessandro Paniccia; Parag J Parikh; Niek A Peters; Hans Rabl; Jaswinder Samra; Christoph Tinchon; Geertjan van Tienhoven; Eran van Veldhuisen; Andrea Wang-Gillam; Matthew J Weiss; Johanna W Wilmink; Hiroki Yamaue; Marjolein Y V Homs; Casper H J van Eijck; Matthew H G Katz; Bas Groot Koerkamp Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Mashaal Dhir; Mazen S Zenati; Ahmad Hamad; Aatur D Singhi; Nathan Bahary; Melissa E Hogg; Herbert J Zeh; Amer H Zureikat Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2018-05-14 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Shengliang He; Ding Ding; Michael J Wright; Lara Groshek; Ammar A Javed; Kevin Ka-Wan Chu; Richard A Burkhart; John L Cameron; Matthew J Weiss; Christopher L Wolfgang; Jin He Journal: Surgery Date: 2019-12-11 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Mark D Girgis; Mazen S Zenati; Jonathan C King; Ahmad Hamad; Amer H Zureikat; Herbert J Zeh; Melissa E Hogg Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2019-10-28 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Hassan Aziz; Muhammad Khan; Sara Khan; Guillermo P Serra; Martin D Goodman; Yuri Genyk; Mohd Raashid Sheikh Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2021-08-16