Robot-assisted spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy (RA-SPDP): a single center experience

Abstract

Aim: To define the outcome of robot-assisted spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy (RA-SPDP) in a high-volume center.

Methods: A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was performed to identify RA-SPDP performed at our Center between April 2008 to October 2017.

Results: During the study period, RA-SPDP was attempted in 54 patients. The spleen was preserved, always along with the splenic vessels (Kimura procedure), in 52 patients (96.3%). There were no conversions to open or laparoscopic surgery. Mean operative time was 260 min (231.3-360.0). Grade B post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) occurred in 19 patients (35.2%). There were no grade C POPF. Two patients required repeat surgery because of postoperative bleeding and splenic infarction, respectively. There were no post-operative deaths at 90 days. Excluding one patient with known diagnosis of metastasis from renal cell carcinoma, malignancy was eventually identified in 7 of 53 patients (13.2%).

Conclusion: In the hands of dedicated pancreatic surgeons, robotic assistance results in a high rate of spleen preservation with good clinical outcomes. Despite careful preoperative selection, several patients can be found to have a malignant tumor. Taken altogether these results suggest that patients requiring these procedures should be preferentially referred to specialized centers.

Keywords

Robotic / robot / pancreas / spleen / distal / pancreatectomy / preserving

References

[1] Asbun HJ,Vissers FL,Cipriani F.The miami international evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection..Ann Surg2020;271:1-14

[2] Briggs CD,Irving GRB,Peterson M.Systematic review of minimally invasive pancreatic resection..J Gastrointest Surg2009;13:1129-37

[3] Leonard AS,Baesl TJ.The overwhelming postsplenectomy sepsis problem..World J Surg1980;4:423-32

[4] Malangoni MA,Klamer TW.Factors influencing the risk of early and late serious infection in adults after splenectomy for trauma..Surgery1984;96:775-83

[5] Buzelé R,Sauvanet A.Medical complications following splenectomy..J Visc Surg2016;153:277-86

[6] Rottenstreich A,Spectre G,Ziv E.Thromboembolic events following splenectomy: risk factors, prevention, management and outcomes..World J Surg2018;42:675-81

[7] Kimura W,Sugawara S,Sato T.Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with conservation of the splenic artery and vein: techniques and its significance..J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci2010;17:813-23

[8] Kimura W,Futakawa N,Han I.Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with conservation of the splenic artery and vein..Surgery1996;120:885-90

[9] Warshaw AL.Conservation of the spleen with distal pancreatectomy..Arch Surg1988;123:550-3

[10] Freschi C,Melfi F,Mosca F.Technical review of the da Vinci surgical telemanipulator..Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg2013;9:396-406

[11] Moorthy K,Dosis A,Martin S.Dexterity enhancement with robotic surgery..Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech2004;18:790-5

[12] von Elm E,Egger M,Gøtzsche PC.The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies..J Clin Epidemiol2008;61:344-9

[13] Keats AS.The ASA classification of physical status - a recapitulation..Anesthesiology1978;49:233-6

[14] Napoli N,Menonna F,Cacace C.Robot-assisted radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy including resection and reconstruction of the spleno-mesenteric junction..J Vis Exp2020;

[15] Napoli N,Perrone VG,Brozzetti S.The learning curve in robotic distal pancreatectomy..Updates Surg2015;67:257-64

[16] Kauffmann EF,Menonna F,Genovese V.Robot-assisted spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy: case report..Ann Laparosc Endosc Surg2020;

[17] Bassi C,Dervenis C,Abu Hilal M.The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after..Surg2017;161:584-91

[18] Wente MN,Dervenis C,Gouma DJ.Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the international study group of pancreatic surgery (ISGPS)..Surgery2007;142:761-8

[19] Wente MN,Bassi C,Fingerhut A.Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH)-an international study group of pancreatic surgery (ISGPS) definition..Surgery2007;142:20-5

[20] Dindo D,Clavien PA.Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey..Ann Surg2004;240:205-13 PMCID:PMC1360123

[21] Slankamenac K,Barkun J,Clavien PA.The comprehensive complication index: a novel continuous scale to measure surgical morbidity..Ann Surg2013;258:1-7

[22] Del Chiaro M,Scholten L,Cahen DL.European evidence-based guidelines on pancreatic cystic neoplasms..Gut2018;67:789-804 PMCID:PMC5890653

[23] Capretti G,Salvia R,Coppola R.Application of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery: an Italian survey..Updates Surg2019;71:97-103

[24] Balzano G,Boggi U,Zerbi A.A multicenter survey on distal pancreatectomy in Italy: results of minimally invasive technique and variability of perioperative pathways..Updates Surg2014;66:253-63

[25] Klompmaker S,Watkins AA,Tseng JF.Nationwide evaluation of patient selection for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy using American College of Surgeons’ National Quality Improvement Program..Ann Surg2017;266:1055-61

[26] Ohtsuka T,Nakamura Y,Tanabe M.Difficulty scoring system in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy..J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci2018;25:489-97

[27] Sharib JM,Swords DS,Bracci PM.Surgical overtreatment of pancreatic intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms: do the 2017 international consensus guidelines improve clinical decision making?.Surg (United States)2018;164:1178-84

[28] Balzano G,Callea G,Carle F.Overuse of surgery in patients with pancreatic cancer. A nationwide analysis in Italy..HPB2016;18:470-8 PMCID:PMC4857063

[29] Pietrabissa A,Boggi U,Mosca F.Laparoscopic distal pancreatomy: Are we ready for a standardized technique?.Semin Laparosc Surg2004;11:179-83

[30] Hong S,Madkhali AA,Yoo D.Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for left-sided pancreatic tumors: a single surgeon’s experience of 228 consecutive cases..Surg Endosc2020;34:2465-73

[31] Chen S,Chen JZ,Deng XX.Robotic approach improves spleen-preserving rate and shortens postoperative hospital stay of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a matched cohort study..Surg Endosc2015;29:3507-18

[32] Waters JA,Wiebke EA,Beane JD.Robotic distal pancreatectomy: cost effective?.Surgery2010;148:814-23

[33] Daouadi M,Zenati MS,Tsung A.Robot-assisted minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is superior to the laparoscopic technique..Ann Surg2013;257:128-32

[34] Huang B,Zhao J.Systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for benign and malignant pancreatic lesions..Surg Endosc2016;30:4078-85

[35] Li BQ,Li J,Guo JC.Preservation or ligation of splenic vessels during spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: a meta-analysis..J Investig Surg2019;32:654-69

[36] Esposito A,De Pastena M,Montagnini G.Robotic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: the Verona experience..Updates Surg2020;

[37] Eckhardt S,Maurer E,Bartsch DK.Robotic-assisted approach improves vessel preservation in spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy..Dig Surg2016;33:406-13

[38] Lombardo C,Menonna F,Kauffmann E.Incidence and reasons of pancreatic resection in patients with asymptomatic serous cystadenoma..Pancreatology2018;S1424-3903:30606-9

[39] Kawaguchi Y,Nomi T,Gayet B.Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy employing radical en bloc procedure for adenocarcinoma: technical details and outcomes..Surg2015;157:1106-12

[40] Ceppa EP,Becerra DC,Zyromski NJ.Does pancreatic stump closure method influence distal pancreatectomy outcomes?.J Gastrointest Surg2015;19:1449-56