Robotic distal pancreatectomy versus conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a comparative study for short-term outcomes

Eric C. H. Lai, Chung Ngai Tang

PDF(82 KB)
PDF(82 KB)
Front. Med. ›› 2015, Vol. 9 ›› Issue (3) : 356-360. DOI: 10.1007/s11684-015-0404-0
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Robotic distal pancreatectomy versus conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a comparative study for short-term outcomes

Author information +
History +

Abstract

Robotic system has been increasingly used in pancreatectomy. However, the effectiveness of this method remains uncertain. This study compared the surgical outcomes between robot-assisted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. During a 15-year period, 35 patients underwent minimally invasive approach of distal pancreatectomy in our center. Seventeen of these patients had robot-assisted laparoscopic approach, and the remaining 18 had conventional laparoscopic approach. Their operative parameters and perioperative outcomes were analyzed retrospectively in a prospective database. The mean operating time in the robotic group (221.4 min) was significantly longer than that in the laparoscopic group (173.6 min) (P = 0.026). Both robotic and conventional laparoscopic groups presented no significant difference in spleen-preservation rate (52.9% vs. 38.9%) (P = 0.505), operative blood loss (100.3 ml vs. 268.3 ml) (P = 0.29), overall morbidity rate (47.1% vs. 38.9%) (P = 0.73), and post-operative hospital stay (11.4 days vs. 14.2 days) (P = 0.46). Both groups also showed no perioperative mortality. Similar outcomes were observed in robotic distal pancreatectomy and conventional laparoscopic approach. However, robotic approach tended to have the advantages of less blood loss and shorter hospital stay. Further studies are necessary to determine the clinical position of robotic distal pancreatectomy.

Keywords

distal pancreatectomy / pancreatic neoplasm / robotic surgery

Cite this article

Download citation ▾
Eric C. H. Lai, Chung Ngai Tang. Robotic distal pancreatectomy versus conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a comparative study for short-term outcomes. Front. Med., 2015, 9(3): 356‒360 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11684-015-0404-0

References

[1]
Lai EC, Tang CN. Current status of robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy: a comprehensive review. Asian J Endosc Surg2013; 6(3): 158–164
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[2]
Giulianotti PC, Sbrana F, Bianco FM, Elli EF, Shah G, Addeo P, Caravaglios G, Coratti A. Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: single-surgeon experience. Surg Endosc2010; 24(7): 1646–1657
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[3]
Zureikat AH, Moser AJ, Boone BA, Bartlett DL, Zenati M, Zeh HJ 3rd. 250 robotic pancreatic resections: safety and feasibility. Ann Surg2013; 258(4): 554–559, discussion 559-562
Pubmed
[4]
Waters JA, Canal DF, Wiebke EA, Dumas RP, Beane JD, Aguilar-Saavedra JR, Ball CG, House MG, Zyromski NJ, Nakeeb A, Pitt HA, Lillemoe KD, Schmidt CM. Robotic distal pancreatectomy: cost effective? Surgery2010; 148(4): 814–823
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[5]
Kang CM, Kim DH, Lee WJ, Chi HS. Conventional laparoscopic and robot-assisted spleen-preserving pancreatectomy: does da Vinci have clinical advantages? Surg Endosc2011; 25(6): 2004–2009
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[6]
Daouadi M, Zureikat AH, Zenati MS, Choudry H, Tsung A, Bartlett DL, Hughes SJ, Lee KK, Moser AJ, Zeh HJ. Robot-assisted minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is superior to the laparoscopic technique. Ann Surg2013; 257(1): 128–132
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[7]
Lee SY, Allen PJ, Sadot E, D’Angelica MI, DeMatteo RP, Fong Y, Jarnagin WR, Kingham TP. Distal pancreatectomy: a single institution’s experience in open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches. J Am Coll Surg2015; 220(1): 18–27
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[8]
Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G, Fingerhut A, Yeo C, Izbicki J, Neoptolemos J, Sarr M, Traverso W, Buchler M; International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula Definition. Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery2005; 138(1): 8–13
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[9]
Pratt WB, Maithel SK, Vanounou T, Huang ZS, Callery MP, Vollmer CM Jr. Clinical and economic validation of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF) classification scheme. Ann Surg2007; 245(3): 443–451
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[10]
Tang CN, Tsui KK, Ha JP, Wong DC, Li MK. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a comparative study. Hepatogastroenterology2007; 54(73): 265–271
Pubmed
[11]
Jusoh AC, Ammori BJ. Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review of comparative studies. Surg Endosc2012; 26(4): 904–913
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[12]
Venkat R, Edil BH, Schulick RD, Lidor AO, Makary MA, Wolfgang CL. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is associated with significantly less overall morbidity compared to the open technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg2012; 255(6): 1048–1059
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[13]
Gagner M, Pomp A, Herrera MF. Early experience with laparoscopic resections of islet cell tumors. Surgery1996; 120(6): 1051–1054
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[14]
Cuschieri A. Laparoscopic surgery of the pancreas. J R Coll Surg Edinb1994; 39(3): 178–184
Pubmed

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2014 Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
AI Summary AI Mindmap
PDF(82 KB)

Accesses

Citations

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/