Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has emerged as a promising surgical approach for the treatment of periampullary neoplasms, offering the potential benefits of minimally invasive surgery. However, the impact of RPD on clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (CR-PF) rates and overall costs compared to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) remains unclear, limiting its widespread adoption.

This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a high-volume Japanese referral center from 2017 to 2023. A total of 193 patients diagnosed with periampullary neoplasms underwent either RPD (n = 81) or OPD (n = 112). To account for potential selection bias, propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance patient demographics and clinical characteristics, resulting in two well-matched groups of 60 patients each. Perioperative outcomes, CR-PF rates, and a comprehensive cost analysis were evaluated.

RPD resulted in a significantly lower rate of CR-PF (10%) compared to OPD (33.3%) (p = 0.003). Additionally, patients who underwent RPD experienced shorter hospital stays (15 days) compared to those in the OPD group (22.5 days) (p < 0.001). Despite longer operative times for RPD (633 vs. 395 min; p < 0.001), total hospital costs were comparable between the two groups. The higher operative costs associated with RPD were offset by reduced postoperative complications and shorter hospitalization.

RPD offers significant clinical advantages, including lower CR-PF rates and reduced hospital stays, without increasing overall hospital costs compared to OPD. These findings support the feasibility and potential benefits of adopting RPD for the management of periampullary neoplasms in clinical practice.

Limited research has been conducted on the short-term outcomes comparing laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD), particularly in the post-learning curve stage. This study aims to investigate surgical efficacy and provide clinical practices for selecting suitable techniques between LPD and RPD.

A retrospective study was conducted on consecutive patients who underwent RPD and LPD between April 2016 and December 2023. Baseline characteristics, pathological information, and perioperative data were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to ensure the comparability of important factors between the groups.

A total of 277 patients were enrolled in the study, of which 145 underwent RPD. Following PSM, 116 patients were included in each group and baseline characteristics were well matched. The RPD group demonstrated a lower conversion rate to laparotomy (5.2% vs. 18.1%, p = 0.002), reduced blood loss (350 vs. 500 ml, p = 0.031), and a higher rate of R0 resection (91.4% vs. 80.7%, p < 0.05) compared to the laparoscopic group. The incidence of B2-Grade postoperative pancreatic fistula (B2-POPF) was also lower in the RPD group compared to the LPD group (4.3% vs. 11.2%, p = 0.037). Among patients in the post-learning curve stage, perioperative outcomes were similar between the two groups.

RPD offered several advantages over LPD, including lower rates of conversion to open and blood loss, higher rates of R0 resection, and improved POPF outcomes. Other perioperative outcomes were comparable between the two groups. Both techniques appeared feasible and safe in experienced surgeons, though RPD was preferred in complex cases.

This study investigated whether blood loss (BL) was. truly less in patients undergoing laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) than in those undergoing open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD).

A total of 98 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy between 2021 and 2023 were divided into OPD and LPD groups and compared. Estimated BL was calculated from the perioperative changes in hematocrit, hemoglobin, or red blood cell volume. Actual BL was calculated using the conventional method as the sum of the intraoperative aspirated blood volume and surgical gauze weight.

Actual BL was significantly lower in the LPD group than in the OPD group (150 [80-350] ml vs. 345 [150-700] ml, p = 0.003). However, there were no significant differences in the estimated BL calculated from the hematocrit (461 [187-626] ml vs. 351 [153-737] ml, p = 0.972), hemoglobin, or red blood cell volume. Estimated BL showed a stronger linear correlation with actual BL in the OPD group (r = 0.447-0.669) than in the LPD group (r = 0.158-0.417). OPD was not a significant factor in the increased estimated BL.

The conventional method for calculating the BL in LPD may underestimate the actual loss, highlighting the need for a more accurate method of evaluation.

This study delineates the learning curve of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy for first-generation surgeons, using the Comprehensive Complication Index to assess patient outcomes.

Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy is a promising alternative to open pancreatoduodenectomy, but patient safety and quality of outcomes during the learning phase remain critical.

We retrospectively analyzed 313 consecutive robotic pancreatoduodenectomies performed by a single surgeon. The cumulative-sum method defined the learning curve, and Comprehensive Complication Index, adjusted for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy difficulty by PD-ROBOSCORE, was the dependent variable.

The median PD-ROBOSCORE was 8 (4.8-10.9), and the median Comprehensive Complication Index was 29.6 (20.9-39.5). At 90 days, severe morbidity and mortality rates were 24% and 5.4%, respectively. Three learning phases were identified: competency (63 procedures), proficiency (176), and mastery (263). Early phases involved simpler cases, whereas later phases showed greater complexity and a higher proportion of patients with ASA scores >2. Pancreatic cancer cases tripled in phases 2 and 3. Each phase showed progressive reductions in operative time and Comprehensive Complication Index. The mastery phase demonstrated further improvements in Comprehensive Complication Index, lymph node harvest, and margin status. Compared with proficiency, mastery saw improved outcomes in delayed gastric emptying, harvested lymph nodes, and R1 rates in pancreatic cancer. Operative time was longer, but morbidity and mortality remained stable.

The robotic pancreatoduodenectomy learning process involves competency, proficiency, and mastery phases. Structured training programs may accelerate this learning curve, but high procedural volumes are essential to improve outcomes. Future studies should account for surgeon experience and case complexity when evaluating robotic pancreatoduodenectomy outcomes.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has an estimated 5-year survival rate of 11% and remains a formidable challenge. Despite evolving pancreaticoduodenectomy techniques, the pinnacle status of laparoscopic surgery persists. Technological advancements since Gagner and Pomp's 1994 breakthrough have expanded its reach, yet it remains complex. Although safety reports exist, large-scale studies establishing the viability of laparoscopic surgery for PDAC are scarce. This study aimed to provide an up-to-date meta-analysis, scrutinizing all relevant trials, especially recently published ones, to discern differences between laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy procedures. This meta-analysis, following the PRISMA guidelines, systematically searched the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials on pancreaticoduodenectomy up to November 25, 2023. Data extraction, quality assessment, and statistical analysis, including primary and secondary outcomes, were conducted using rigorous methodology. The study employed Review Manager 5.4 for analysis, with significance set at P < 0.05. This meta-analysis, comprising five randomized controlled trials (laparoscopic, 605; open, 601; total, 1206), utilized the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, revealing minimal bias. Primary outcome analysis indicated a shorter hospital stay with laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (S.M.D. =  - 0.18, 95% CI - 0.63 - 0.28, P = 0.45) and reduced blood loss (S.M.D. =  - 1.96, 95% CI - 3.05, 0.88, P = 0.0004), but increased operative time (S.M.D. = 1.74, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.53, P < 0.0001). The secondary outcomes showed no significant differences in morbidity, mortality, resection, fistula, gastric emptying, hemorrhage, bile leak, reoperation, readmission, and surgical site infection between the two procedures. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) offers marginal benefits over open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD), including reduced blood loss and shorter hospital stays. However, LPD requires a significantly longer operative time, and no substantial differences have been observed in terms of mortality or other complications. Additional studies with lower heterogeneity are needed to thoroughly evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of LPD and OPD.

Hypoattenuated area (HA) formation at the pancreatojejunostomy (PJ) site on contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) is significantly associated with clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) after open pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) (O-PD). Here, we evaluated the impact of HA formation in robotic PD (R-PD) and surgical factors predictive of HA formation.

The study retrospectively analyzed 66 patients who underwent either O-PD or R-PD and exhibited a drain amylase level exceeding three times the upper limit of normal range, with CE-CT assessment performed on postoperative days 3-14. Patients were divided into two groups, with evident HA (≥ 5 mm) (E-HA) and subtle HA (< 5 mm) (S-HA), and their data were analyzed by multivariate and propensity-score matching analyses.

Among the patients, 24 (36.3%) exhibited E-HA and 42 (63.7%) S-HA. The percentages of R-PD and CR-POPF in E-HA group were significantly lower and higher, respectively, than S-HA group (R-PD: 29.2% vs 54.8%, p = 0.0446; CR-POPF: 70.8% vs 4.8%, p < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis revealed the surgical approach as a significant factor associated with E-HA formation (odds ratio: 0.26; p = 0.0223). Propensity-score matching analysis revealed significantly fewer patients with E-HA formation and CR-POPF in R-PD group than O-PD group (E-HA: 14.3% vs 64.3%, p = 0.0068; CR-POPF: 14.3% vs 57.1%, p = 0.0180).

The impact of HA formation in predicting CR-POPF was confirmed in the patients undergoing PD, including O-PD and R-PD. Furthermore, the data suggest that R-PD, compared with O-PD, significantly decreased the incidence of E-HA formation, indicating an advantage of R-PD over O-PD in reducing CR-POPF via HA formation.

Objective and accurate assessment of blood loss during pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is crucial for ensuring the safety and efficacy of the procedure. While the visual method remains the most common clinical metric, many scholars argue that it significantly differs from actual blood loss and is inherently subjective.

To assess blood loss in PD via delta hemoglobin (ΔHb) and compare it with the visual method to predict bleeding-related risk factors.

In this retrospective analysis, 1722 patients who underwent PD from 2017 to 2022 at Shandong Provincial Hospital were divided into three groups: Open PD (OPD), laparoscopic PD (LPD), and conversion to OPD (CTOPD). Intraoperative ΔHb (IΔHb) was calculated via preoperative and 72-hour-postoperative hemoglobin concentrations, and its association with visually obtained estimated blood loss (EBL) was analyzed. Perioperative ΔHb (PΔHb) was calculated via preoperative and predischarge hemoglobin concentrations. We compared the differences in IΔHb and PΔHb among the three groups, and performed univariate and multivariate regression analyses of IΔHb and PΔHb.

The preoperative general information of patients showed no statistically significant difference among the three groups (P > 0.05). The IΔHb in the OPD, LPD, and CTOPD groups were 22.00 (12.00, 36.00), 21.00 (10.00, 33.00), and 33.00 (18.12, 52.24) g/L, respectively; And the PΔHb in the OPD, LPD, and CTOPD groups were 25.87 (13.51, 42.00), 25.00 (14.00, 45.00), and 37.48 (21.64, 59.65) g/L, respectively, values significantly differed (P < 0.05). IΔHb and EBL were significantly correlated (r = 0.337, P < 0.001). The results of univariate and multivariate regression analyses indicated that American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification IV [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.330-37.811, P = 0.049] and preoperative total bilirubin > 200 μmol/L (95%CI: 2.805-8.673, P < 0.001) were independent risk factors for IΔHb (P < 0.05), and ASA classification IV (95%CI: 45.934-105.485, P < 0.001), body mass index > 24 kg/m2 (95%CI: 1.285-9.890, P = 0.011), and preoperative total bilirubin > 200 μmol/L (95%CI: 6.948-16.797, P < 0.001) were independent risk factors for PΔHb (P < 0.05).

There is a correlation between IΔHb and EBL in PD, so we can assess the patients' intraoperative blood loss by the ΔHb method. ASA classification IV, body mass index > 24 kg/m², and preoperative total bilirubin > 200 μmol/L increased perioperative bleeding risk.

Despite descriptions of different pancreatojejunostomy procedures using robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD), a standardized procedure has not yet been established. No prior report has described pancreatojejunostomy by RPD combined with modified Blumgart anastomosis with continuous suturing for duct-to-mucosa anastomosis. This study investigated this surgical technique and evaluated the short-term outcomes of the simplified pancreatojejunostomy procedure.

Between December 2021 and March 2024, 36 patients underwent pancreatojejunostomy using modified Blumgart anastomosis with continuous suturing for duct-to-mucosa anastomosis using RPD. Patients were divided into an early group (n = 15), without the use of the new four-needle three-loop suture device during the modified Blumgart anastomosis and a late group (n = 21) that did use this device.

The late group had a significantly shorter pancreatojejunostomy duration (60 min vs. 49 min, p = 0.004) than the early group. Both groups showed equivalent postoperative outcomes; however, the late group exhibited a trend toward a lower rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula grade ≥ B (26.7% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.138).

Pancreatojejunostomy using modified Blumgart anastomosis with a four-needle three-loop suture device and continuous suture for duct-to-mucosa anastomosis in patients undergoing RPD is simple and effective. This new suturing device may further reduce the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistulas.

Distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA) is an aggressive malignancy with poor prognosis. This study aimed to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes and "textbook outcome (TO)" between laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for dCCA after the learning curve of surgeons.

Clinical and follow-up data were included for dCCA patients treated with LPD or OPD at our center between January 2017 and December 2022. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to minimize bias between groups. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine independent prognostic factors for TO.

A total of 430 patients were enrolled in the study, 224 in the LPD group and 206 in the OPD group. After PSM, 184 patients were included in each group. There were no significant differences in operative duration, lymph nodes harvest, intraoperative transfusion, vascular resection, R0 resection, severe complications, readmission rate, 30-day mortality, TO, and long-term prognosis between the two groups before and after PSM (all P > 0.05). Compared with OPD, LPD had less estimated blood loss (160 vs. 250mL, P < 0.001) and shorter postoperative length of stay (13 vs. 16 days, P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that texture of pancreas [hard vs. soft, Odds Ratio (OR) 2.016; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.276-3.184; P = 0.003] and operation duration (> 360 min vs. ≤ 360 min, OR 0.595, 95% CI 0.375-0.944, P = 0.027) were independent prognostic factors for TO.

After learning curve, LPD is safe and feasible for the treatment of dCCA, with the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss and faster postoperative recovery.

Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy has gained widespread acceptance among hepatopancreatobiliary surgeons due to its demonstrated advantages in perioperative outcomes compared to the conventional open approach. This meta-analysis, along with trial sequential analysis, aimed to compare the outcomes of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy based on the current available evidence.

A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted from inception to July 2024. We assessed intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, including open conversion rates, readmission, reoperation, and mortality. Additional factors, such as blood loss and the number of lymph nodes resected, were also evaluated. Quality assessment was performed using Cochrane's risk of bias tools. Subgroup analysis was conducted based on propensity score matching status, and trial sequential analysis was applied to statistically significant results on first analysis.

We meta-analyzed seventeen studies, with a total of 5,483 patients. The meta-analysis reported lower rates of open conversion (OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.26-0.61; p = < 0.001) and a higher number of lymph nodes resected (MD 3.5; 95% CI 1.45-5.55; p = 0.0008) in the RPD group. These results remained consistent after subgroup analysis. Trial sequential analysis confirmed true positive results, indicating that further studies are unnecessary to detect a significant difference. However, other perioperative outcomes did not show statistical significance and failed to reach the required information size for definitive conclusions.

This meta-analysis of non-randomized cohorts found lower rates of open conversion and a higher number of lymph nodes resected in patients undergoing robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. However, the initial analysis did not reveal statistically significant differences in transfusion rates, multivisceral and vascular resections, hemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying, mortality, or readmission rates. Future studies should focus on randomized designs, target more specific populations, and include long-term outcomes for a more comprehensive analysis.

Acinar cell carcinoma of the pancreas (ACCP) is an exceptionally rare malignancy, accounting for <1% of all exocrine pancreatic tumors. This case report describes a 78-year-old male presenting with abdominal pain, weight loss, and anorexia, diagnosed with a tumor in the pancreatic body through imaging and biopsy. The patient underwent a robot-assisted corpo-caudal pancreatectomy and splenectomy using the Da Vinci system. This approach enabled precise resection with minimal blood loss and preservation of critical structures. Histopathology confirmed a well-differentiated acinar cell carcinoma with tumor-free margins. The postoperative course was uneventful, and follow-up imaging at three and six months demonstrated no recurrence or metastasis. This case underscores the advantages of robotic-assisted surgery, including enhanced precision, reduced complications, and optimized recovery, highlighting its role as a transformative tool for managing complex pancreatic tumors like ACCP.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the leading causes of death worldwide, and its global burden has increased significantly over the past few years. The incidence of pancreatic cancer has also increased in the United States, and most of this increase is attributed to the population's aging process in addition to the rise in the prevalence of risk factors such as obesity, diabetes, smoking, and alcohol intake. Most patients with pancreatic cancer present with advanced unresectable or metastatic disease. Only a few patients present at an early stage with localized disease, and a multidisciplinary approach is required to maximize survival and outcomes. The surgical approach is an option for localized disease, and surgery's safety and efficacy have also been improved in recent years due to the increasing use of minimally invasive surgical techniques. Moreover, systematic chemotherapy has also been used and has had a significant impact on survival. More recently, neoadjuvant therapy has been used for pancreatic cancer along with radiation therapy, optimizing survival among those patients. Targeted therapies have been introduced based on genetic testing in metastatic pancreatic cancer and have shown promising results. Moreover, immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted agents such as PARP inhibitors and vaccines have emerged with optimal results in terms of survival. To conclude, pancreatic cancer is considered a disease with poor long-term survival; however, recent developments in pharmacotherapy have changed its treatment and have improved outcomes with improved survival. Our review summarizes ongoing therapeutic options for local and metastatic pancreatic cancer. It also summarizes new state-of-the-art therapies that have emerged or are in trials, which can change the pancreatic cancer treatment perspective.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) with superior mesenteric artery (SMA) left posterior first approach and circumferential lymphadenectomy with total meso-pancreas (MP) dissection for periampullary malignancies.

31 patients who underwent LPD with left posterior SMA first-approach and circumferential lymphadenectomy with total MP dissection between September 2021 and September 2023. General characteristics, operative techniques, short-term outcomes and pathological results were prospectively evaluated.

The mean operation time and SMA first-approach time were 441.9 ± 73.7 min and 99.9 ± 27.7 min, respectively. The median intraoperative blood loss was 143 ml (range: 50-1500 ml). The median number of total LNs and left-sided SMA LNs harvested were 32,7 ± 13 (16-74) and 7,4 ± 6 (range: 3-30), respectively. The rate of metastatic left-sided SMA LNs and meso-pancreas were 25.8% and 22.6%, respectively. 22.6% of patients had pancreatic fistula, but mostly in grade A, with only one case that required conversion. Only one case developed postoperative refractory diarrhea. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 14.1 days. No 90-day mortality was reported.

LPD with left posterior SMA first-approach and circumferential lymphadenectomy with total MP dissection was safe and effective with favorable short-term outcomes.

Overweight is thought to affect the outcome of minimally invasive surgery. There is still a lack of controlled studies of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) in overweight patients. This study was designed to compare short-term and long-term outcomes in overweight patients treated with LPD and OPD.

Clinical and follow-up data on overweight patients who received LPD or OPD at Shandong Provincial Hospital from January 2015 to December 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. The bias between groups were balanced by 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM). Kaplan-Meier survival curves described long-term survival outcomes in overweight pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients.

A total of 502 overweight patients were enrolled in the study. There were 276 patients in the LPD group and 226 in the OPD group. After matching, 196 patients were enrolled in each group. Compared with the OPD group, the LPD group had fewer estimated blood loss (EBL) (140 vs. 200 mL, P < 0.001), more lymph node dissection (14 vs. 12, P = 0.010), and shorter postoperative length of stay (LOS) (13 vs. 16 days, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in severe complications, 90-day readmission and mortality rates (all P > 0.05). The subgroup analysis of obese patients also showed that the LPD group had fewer intraoperative EBL, more lymph node dissection, and shorter LOS. The survival analysis showed that overweight patients with PDAC who underwent LPD or OPD had similar overall survival (OS) (23.8 vs.25.7 months, P = 0.963) after PSM.

It is safe and feasible for overweight patients undergoing LPD to have less EBL, more lymph node harvesting, and a shorter LOS. There was no statistically significant difference in long-term survival outcomes among overweight PDAC patients between the two approaches.

Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) is considered one of the most complex procedures in general surgery. The number of articles on MIPD has been increasing annually. However, published reports often have complex research directions, and the focal points frequently change. Therefore, a comprehensive review and organization of the literature in this field is necessary.

To summarize current research, predict future hotspots and trends, and provide insights for MIPD development.

To conduct the study, the Web of Science Core Collection was searched for relevant articles. The analysis focused on the top 100 articles in the field. Two widely used bibliometric tools, CiteSpace and VOSviewer, were used to examine various aspects, including research directions, authors, countries, institutions, journals, and keywords.

The top 100 articles were published between 2005 and 2022, with the majority originating from the United States (n = 51). Among the contributing institutions, Pancreas Center of the University of Chicago and the Health System of the University of Chicago had the highest number of publications (n = 17). In terms of individual authors, "Zeh HJ" and "Zureikat AH" led with 13 articles each. The high-frequency keywords in the literature encompassed three main areas: Surgical modality, perioperative outcomes, and the learning curve. These keywords were further categorized into seven primary clusters, with the largest being "laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy".

The most influential studies predominantly originate from the United States, and there is growing interest in robotic surgery. Despite MIPD's potential benefits, further research is required to address technical challenges and improve outcomes.

Although laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) and robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) are gradually gaining popularity, their advantages over open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) remain controversial. This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of OPD, LPD, and RPD to elucidate the advantages and disadvantages of each procedure.

We retrospectively analyzed 16 LPD, 43 RPD, and 36 OPD procedures performed at a single center between April 2020 and May 2024. Clinical data, including operative time, estimated blood loss, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and hospitalization costs, were retrospectively collected and analyzed.

RPD demonstrated a significantly longer operative time (553 min) than OPD (446 min) and LPD (453 min) but a significantly lower estimated blood loss than OPD (150 mL vs. 400 mL, p < .001). Postoperative complication rates (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3) were lower for RPD (24.4%) than those for OPD (50.0%) and LPD (68.8%). RPD also showed a significantly lower rate of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (14.6% vs. 38.9% for OPD and 43.8% for LPD) and a shorter duration of hospitalization (11 vs. 28 days for OPD and 21 days for LPD, p < .001). Hospitalization costs were higher for RPD (20 109 USD) than for OPD (18 487 USD, p < .001), with LPD (20 496 USD) and RPD costs being similar.

RPD appears to offer advantages in terms of reduced blood loss and postoperative complications and shortened hospital stay despite longer operative times and higher hospitalization costs. Therefore, RPD may be a more beneficial approach than OPD or LPD in pancreatic surgery.

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) is used more commonly, but this surge is mostly based on observational data. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the short-term outcomes between RPD and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) using data collected from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-score-matched (PSM) studies.

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases for RCTs and PSM studies comparing RPD and OPD. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

Twenty-four studies, encompassing two RCTs and 22 PSM studies, were included, with a total of 9393 patients (RPD group: 3919 patients; OPD group: 5474 patients). Although RPD was associated with a longer operative time (MD, 61.61 min), patients may benefit from reduced blood loss (MD, -154.05 ml), shorter length of stay (MD, -1.60 days), lower blood transfusion rate (RR, 0.85), and wound infection rate (RR, 0.61). There were no significant differences observed in 30-day readmission (RR, 0.99), 90-day mortality (RR, 0.97), overall morbidity (RR, 0.88), major complications (RR, 1.01), reoperation (RR, 1.08), bile leak (RR, 1.01), chylous leak (RR, 0.98), postoperative pancreatic fistula (RR, 0.97), post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (RR, 1.15), delayed gastric emptying (RR, 0.88), number of harvested lymph nodes (MD, -0.12), and R0 resection (RR, 1.01) between the groups.

Although some short-term outcomes were similar between RPD and OPD, RPD exhibited reduced intraoperative blood loss, shorter hospital stays, lower wound infection, and blood transfusion rates. In the future, RPD may become a safe and effective alternative to OPD.

Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD), such as totally laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (TLPD) or robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RAPD), is increasingly performed worldwide. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes of TLPD and RAPD, and compare the oncologic outcomes between MIPD and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for malignant disease.

This retrospective study was conducted at two hospitals that followed similar oncological surgical principles, including the extent of resection. RAPD was performed at Seoul National University Hospital, and TLPD at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. Patient demographics, perioperative outcomes, and oncological outcomes were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to compare oncologic outcomes between MIPD and OPD.

Between 2015 and 2020, 332 RAPD and 178 TLPD were performed. The rates of Clavian-Dindo grade ≥ 3 complications (19.3% vs. 20.2%, p = 0.816), clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (9.9% vs. 11.8%, p = 0.647), and open conversions (6.6% vs. 10.5%, p = 0.163) were comparable between the two groups. The mean operation time (341 minutes vs. 414 minutes, p < 0.001) and postoperative hospital stay were shorter in the RAPD group (11 days vs. 14 days, p = 0.034). After PSM, the 5-year overall survival rate was comparable between MIPD and OPD for overall malignant disease (58.4% vs. 55.5%, p = 0.180).

Both RAPD and TLPD are safe and feasible, and MIPD has clinical outcomes that are comparable to those of OPD. Although RAPD exhibits some advantages, its perioperative outcomes are similar to those associated with TLPD. A surgical method may be selected based on the convenience of surgical movements, medical costs, and operator experience.

Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is a complex abdominal surgery, and the adoption of robotic PD has been on the rise because of its numerous benefits. This study aimed to investigate the current PD trends, focusing on advancements in robotic surgery.

Between 2015 and 2023, 1231 patients underwent open PD, whereas 630 underwent robot-assisted PD (RAPD). Demographics and surgical outcomes were analyzed according to the time period. Moreover, a propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis was performed to evaluate the clinical outcomes.

The proportion of RAPD cases gradually increased from 6.3% in 2015 to 50.9% in 2020, reaching a plateau of >50% thereafter. The proportion of patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy increased during the late period (11.4% vs. 17.6%), with many of these patients undergoing open PD. Additionally, RAPD was performed in patients with a high probability of postoperative pancreatic fistula. However, the two groups demonstrated no significant difference in the occurrence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (10.6% vs. 9.5%, p = .532). Among periampullary cancer cases, RAPD demonstrated comparable survival outcomes to open PD after PSM (5-year survival rate: 61.8% vs. 49.8%, p = .189).

RAPD has become a stable approach, accounting for over 50% of all PD cases in high-volume centers, and it can be safely performed. However, open PD remains important owing to the development of neoadjuvant therapy and the aging population. Therefore, establishing appropriate indications to maximize the benefits of both RAPD and open PD is necessary.

The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) in improving perioperative aspects and postoperative complications in patients.

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library database systems for studies that compared RPD with laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD). Meta-analysis was performed for 24 relevant outcomes, including perioperative outcomes and postoperative complications. Subsequently, a subgroup analysis based on geographical regions was conducted to investigate the impact of regional differences on the perioperative outcomes of the RPD group and the LPD group.

This review found 19 studies with 12,731 individuals (3539 RPD and 9192 LPD). In comparison to LPD, RPD had lower rates of Conversion (OR = 0.58, P < 0.00001), Blood Transfusion (OR = 0.59, P = 0.02), Length of Stay (MD = - 0.54, P = 0.01), postoperative complications [Pneumonia (OR = 0.31, P < 0.0001), and Wound Disruption (OR = 0.26, P = 0.0007)], and more thorough lymph node harvesting (MD = 1.25, P = 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that Blood Transfusion (I2 = 55%, P = 0.02), Conversion (I2 = 30%, P < 0.00001), Length of Stay (I2 = 71%, P = 0.01), and Lymph Node Harvested (I2 = 87%, P = 0.001) were statistically significant. Interestingly, compared to China, other countries had lower rates of Conversion and more lymph nodes harvested for RPD surgery.

The benefits of RPD surgery over LPD surgery in terms of therapy and an optimistic short-term prognosis are clearly supported by this study. Moreover, subgroup analysis based on regional differences revealed statistically significant results for Conversion, Length of Stay (days), Number of Lymph Nodes Harvested and the rate of Blood Transfusion, indicating significant variability across regions. This study provides a solid theoretical foundation and basis for the advancement of RPD in clinical practice.

Whipple pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a complex gastrointestinal surgery that is performed increasingly via minimally invasive approach through robotic platforms. We sought to provide a comparative review of available data regarding robot-assisted vs open PD in terms of cost-effectiveness, overall survival, and other perioperative and long-term oncologic outcomes.

Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched from 1980 to April 2024 using designated keywords. English-language studies comparing costs and oncologic outcomes of robotic vs open PDs were considered for inclusion. Reviews, abstracts, case reports, letters to the editor, and non-English articles were excluded.

A total of 1733 studies were initially identified throughout the literature search. After the removal of duplicates, title and abstract screening identified 16 studies that were included in the review. No statistically significant differences were detected in terms of short-term complications (95% CI, 0.805-1.096; P = .42), mortality (95% CI, 0.599-1.123; P = .21), and readmission (95% CI, 0.959-1.211; P = .20) among patients undergoing open vs robotic PD. Robotic PDs was associated with a slightly better overall survival (95% CI, 1.020-1.233) and higher costs (95% CI, 0.134-1.139; P = .013). Mean length of stay (LOS) was higher in the open PD group (95% CI, -0.353 to 0.189; P < .001).

Robotic-assisted PD had a slightly shorter LOS and improved overall survival. There were no differences in short-term complications, mortality, or readmission. The use of cohort studies and residual potential selection bias necessitate randomized controlled trials to define the benefit of robotic PD.

Minimally invasive surgery (MI) has become the standard of care for many surgical procedures aimed at reducing the burden on patients. However, its adoption in pancreatic surgery (PS) has been limited by the pancreas's unique location and the complexity of the dissection and reconstruction phases. These factors continue to contribute to PS having one of the highest morbidity and mortality rates in general surgery. Despite a rough start, MIPS has gained widespread acceptance in clinical practice recently. Robust evidence supports MI distal pancreatectomy safety, even in oncological cases, indicating its potential superiority over open surgery. However, definitive evidence of MI pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) feasibility and safety, particularly for malignant lesions, is still lacking. Nonetheless, reports from high-volume centers are emerging, suggesting outcomes comparable to those of the open approach. The robotic PS increasing adoption, facilitated by the wider availability of robotic platforms, may further facilitate the transition to MIPD by overcoming the technical constraints associated with laparoscopy and accelerating the learning curve. Although the MIPS implementation process cannot be stopped in this evolving world, ensuring patient safety through strict outcome monitoring is critical. Investing in younger surgeons with structured and recognized training programs can promote safe expansion.

Background: This systematic review, using pairwise and network meta-analyses, aimed to compare the intraoperative, short-term, and long-term postoperative outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open surgery (OS) for the management of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs). Methods: Studies reporting on the effects of robotic, laparoscopic, and open surgery on pNETs published before November 2023 on PubMed, Scopus, and CENTRAL were analyzed. Results: Thirty-two studies with 5379 patients were included in this review, encompassing 2251 patients undergoing MIS (1334 laparoscopic, 508 robotic, and 409 unspecified MIS) and 3128 patients undergoing OS for pNETs management. Pairwise meta-analysis revealed that the MIS group had a significantly shorter length of hospital stay ((a low certainty of evidence), MD of -4.87 (-6.19 to -3.56)); less intraoperative blood loss ((a low certainty of evidence), MD of -108.47 (-177.47 to -39.47)); and decreased tumor recurrence ((a high certainty of evidence), RR of 0.46, 95% CI (0.33 to 0.63)). Subgroup analysis indicated a higher R0 resection rate and prolonged operative time for laparoscopic surgery than for OS. The network meta-analysis ranked the robotic approach as superior in terms of the length of hospital stay, followed by the laparoscopic and OS arms. Furthermore, it favored both MIS approaches over OS in terms of the R0 resection rate. No significant differences were found in severe postoperative complications, postoperative fistula formation, mortality, readmission, reoperation, or conversion rates. Conclusions: This review supports the safety of MIS for the treatment of pNETs. However, the varying certainty of evidence emphasizes the need for higher-quality studies.

Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is one of the most common complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). DGE represents impaired gastric motility without significant mechanical obstruction and is associated with an increased length of hospital stay, increased healthcare costs, and a high readmission rate. We reviewed published studies on various technical modifications to reduce the incidence of DGE.

Studies were identified by searching PubMed for relevant articles published up to December 2022. The following search terms were used: "pancreaticoduodenectomy", "pancreaticojejunostomy", "pancreaticogastrostomy", "gastric emptying", "gastroparesis" and "postoperative complications". The search was limited to English publications. Additional articles were identified by a manual search of references from key articles.

In recent years, various surgical procedures and techniques have been explored to reduce the incidence of DGE. Pyloric resection, Billroth II reconstruction, Braun's enteroenterostomy, and antecolic reconstruction may be associated with a decreased incidence of DGE, but more high-powered studies are needed in the future. Neither laparoscopic nor robotic surgery has demonstrated superiority in preventing DGE, and the use of staplers is controversial regarding whether they can reduce the incidence of DGE.

Despite many innovations in surgical techniques, there is no surgical procedure that is superior to others to reduce DGE. Further larger prospective randomized studies are needed.

The frequency of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is gradually exceeding that of the open approach. Our study aims to compare short-term outcomes of robotic (RDP) and laparoscopic (LDP) distal pancreatectomies for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) using a national database.

The National Cancer Database was utilized to identify patients with PDAC who underwent distal pancreatectomy from 2010-2020. Short-term technical and oncologic outcomes such as margin status and nodal harvest were included. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was performed comparing LDP and RDP cohorts. Multivariate logistic-regression models were then used to assess the impact of institutional volume on the MIDP surgical and technical oncologic outcomes.

1537 patients underwent MIDP with curative intent. Most cases were laparoscopic (74.4%, n = 1144), with a gradual increase in robotic utilization, from 8.7% in 2010 to 32.0% of MIDP cases ten years later. For PSM, 698 LDP patients were matched with 349 RDP. The odds of conversion to an open case were 58% less in RDP (12.6%) compared to LDP (25.5%) with no statistically significant difference in technical oncologic results. There was no difference in length of stay (OR = 1.0[0.7-1.4]), 30-day mortality (OR = 0.5[0.2-2.0]) or 90-day mortality (OR = 1.1[0.5-2.4]) between RDP and LDP, although there was a higher 30-day readmission rate with RDP (OR = 1.71[1.1-2.7]). There were statistically significant differences in technical oncologic outcomes (nodal harvest, margin status, initiation of adjuvant therapy) based on MIDP volume quartiles.

Laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy have similar peri- and post-operative surgical and oncologic outcomes, with a higher rate of conversion to open in the laparoscopic cohort.

Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is not universally adopted because of its steep learning curve. Its technical complexity discourages many surgeons. We believe that laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy with open reconstruction (LPOR) has all the benefits of LPD without its drawbacks and combines the ease of open surgery with the benefits of minimal access surgery. We assessed the feasibility and safety of LPOR and compared it with open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD), with the objectives being perioperative and short-term clinical/oncologic outcomes.

Retrospective review of prospectively maintained database; study period from January 2013 to December 2019. Till 2015, we did only OPD. In 2016, we started with LPD but soon switched to LPOR. The resection part was done laparoscopically and the reconstruction part was done through a 8-cm mini-laparotomy.

We did 19 OPDs and 15 LPORs. Demographic data of the 2 groups were comparable. The duration of surgery was significantly longer in the LPOR group (360 vs. 410 min; P =0.01), whereas the blood loss and hospital stay were longer in the OPD group (520 vs. 360 mL; P =0.03 and 13 vs. 11 d; P =0.08, respectively). Clinically significant complication rates, including delayed gastric emptying and postoperative pancreatic fistulas, were not different in either group. No patients in the LPOR group had wound-related/pulmonary complications. Lymph node yield was similar in both groups (20 vs. 22) and we had 100% R0 resections.

LPOR was better than OPD in terms of short-term outcomes and was not inferior to OPD in terms of complications/oncologic outcomes.

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a challenging operation because of complex anatomy and difficult and multiple reconstructions. Robot-assisted PD (RPD) is a novel minimally invasive technique, providing equivalent oncological outcomes to open surgery. The aim of this study is to evaluate the results of a single high-volume center series.

Patients who underwent RPD from 2014 to 2021 in a high-volume center were included. Patient and disease-specific data, operative details, postoperative complications including postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), length of stay (LOS) and long-term survival were recorded. Two groups were compared: Group 1: patients operated between 2014-2019 and Group 2 between 2020-2021.

One hundred and forty-six patients had RPD on the study period (99 in Group 1 and 47 in Group 2). Operative time was 320 min (285-360), major complications were observed in 28% and clinically significant POPF in 20% of the cases. Conversion rate was 2.1%. LOS was 14 days (9-22). Postoperative mortality was 4.1%. Clinically significant POPF decreased from 24% in Group 1 to 11% in Group 2 (p = 0.05). LOS decreased from 16(11-26) days in Group 1 to 11(8-14) in Group 2 (p < 0.001).

RPD is safe and feasible. Technique standardization led to better post-operative outcomes, encouraging the dissemination and implementation of the procedure.

Minimally invasive procedures minimize trauma to the human body while maintaining satisfactory therapeutic results. Minimally invasive pancreas surgery (MIPS) was introduced in 1994, but questions regarding its efficacy compared to an open approach were widespread. MIPS is associated with several perioperative advantages while maintaining oncological standards when performed by surgeons with a robust training regimen and frequent practice. Future research should focus on addressing learning curve discrepancies while identifying factors associated with shortening the time needed to attain technical proficiency.

Evidence is limited for the treatment of pancreatic cancer among minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy.

This retrospective analysis evaluated patients who underwent robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) or laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) from April 2016 to April 2023. Their baseline and perioperative data, including operative time, R0 resection rates, and severe complications rates, were analyzed, and the follow-up data, such as disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS), were collected.

A total of 253 cases of LPD and RPD were performed, and 101 cases with pancreatic cancer were included, of which 54 were LPD and 47 were RPD. The conversion rate (4.3% vs. 29.6%, p = 0.001) and blood loss (400 vs. 575 mL, p < 0.05) were lower in the RPD group. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of operative time, vessel resection rates, and TNM-stage diagnosis; however, R0 resection rates (80.9% vs. 70.4%) and lymph node harvest (24.2 vs. 21.9) had a higher tendency in the RPD group, and postoperative length of stay was shorter in the RPD cohort (11 vs. 13 days). Moreover, improved 1- to 3-years DFS (75.7%, 61.7%, and 36.0% vs. 59.0%, 35.6%, and 21.9%) and OS (94.7%, 84.7%, and 50.8% vs. 84.1%, 63.6%, and 45.5%) was found in the RPD group in comparison with the LPD group.

RPD had advantages in surgical safety and oncological outcomes compared with LPD, but was similar to the latter in perioperative outcomes. Long-term outcomes require further study.

Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) is one of the most challenging operations and has a long learning curve. Artificial intelligence (AI) automated surgical phase recognition in intraoperative videos has many potential applications in surgical education, helping shorten the learning curve, but no study has made this breakthrough in LPD. Herein, we aimed to build AI models to recognize the surgical phase in LPD and explore the performance characteristics of AI models.

Among 69 LPD videos from a single surgical team, we used 42 in the building group to establish the models and used the remaining 27 videos in the analysis group to assess the models' performance characteristics. We annotated 13 surgical phases of LPD, including 4 key phases and 9 necessary phases. Two minimal invasive pancreatic surgeons annotated all the videos. We built two AI models for the key phase and necessary phase recognition, based on convolutional neural networks. The overall performance of the AI models was determined mainly by mean average precision (mAP).

Overall mAPs of the AI models in the test set of the building group were 89.7% and 84.7% for key phases and necessary phases, respectively. In the 27-video analysis group, overall mAPs were 86.8% and 71.2%, with maximum mAPs of 98.1% and 93.9%. We found commonalities between the error of model recognition and the differences of surgeon annotation, and the AI model exhibited bad performance in cases with anatomic variation or lesion involvement with adjacent organs.

AI automated surgical phase recognition can be achieved in LPD, with outstanding performance in selective cases. This breakthrough may be the first step toward AI- and video-based surgical education in more complex surgeries.

To delineate the risk factors and causes of unplanned reoperations within 30 days following laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD).

A retrospective study reviewed 311 LPD patients at Ningbo Medical Center Li Huili Hospital from 2017 to 2024. Demographic and clinical parameters were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analyses, with P < 0.05 indicating statistical significance.

Out of 311 patients, 23 (7.4%) required unplanned reoperations within 30 days post-LPD, primarily due to postoperative bleeding (82.6%). Other causes included anastomotic leakage, abdominal infection, and afferent loop obstruction. The reoperation intervals varied, with the majority occurring within 0 to 14 days post-surgery. Univariate analysis identified significant risk factors: diabetes, liver cirrhosis, elevated CRP on POD-3 and POD-7, pre-operative serum prealbumin < 0.15 g/L, prolonged operation time, intraoperative bleeding > 120 ml, vascular reconstruction, soft pancreatic texture, and a main pancreatic duct diameter ≤3 mm (all P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis confirmed independent risk factors: pre-operative serum prealbumin < 0.15 g/L (OR = 3.519, 95% CI 1.167-10.613), CRP on POD-7 (OR = 1.013, 95% CI 1.001-1.026), vascular reconstruction (OR = 9.897, 95% CI 2.405-40.733), soft pancreatic texture (OR = 5.243, 95% CI 1.628-16.885), and a main pancreatic duct diameter ≤3 mm (OR = 3.462, 95% CI 1.049-11.423), all associated with unplanned reoperation within 30 days post-LPD (all P < 0.05).

Postoperative bleeding is the primary cause of unplanned reoperations after LPD. Independent risk factors, confirmed by multivariate analysis, include low pre-operative serum prealbumin, elevated CRP on POD-7, vascular reconstruction, soft pancreatic texture, and a main pancreatic duct diameter of ≤3 mm. Comprehensive peri-operative management focusing on these risk factors can reduce the likelihood of unplanned reoperations and improve patient outcomes.

Although robot-assisted surgical procedures using the da Vinci robotic system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) have been performed in more than 13 million procedures worldwide over the last two decades, the vascular surgical community has yet to fully embrace this approach (Intuitive Surgical Investor Presentation Q3 (2023) https://investor.intuitivesurgical.com/static-files/dd0f7e46-db67-4f10-90d9-d826df00554e . Accessed February 22, 2024). In the meantime, endovascular procedures revolutionized vascular care, serving as a minimally invasive alternative to traditional open surgery. In the pursuit of a percutaneous approach, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and fewer perioperative complications, the long-term durability of open surgical vascular reconstruction has been compromised (in Lancet 365:2179-2186, 2005; Patel in Lancet 388:2366-2374, 2016; Wanhainen in Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 57:8-93, 2019). The underlying question is whether the robotic-assisted laparoscopic vascular surgical approaches could deliver the robustness and longevity of open vascular surgical reconstruction, but with a minimally invasive delivery system. In the meantime, other surgical specialties have embraced robot-assisted laparoscopic technology and mastered the essential vascular skillsets along with minimally invasive robotic surgery. For example, surgical procedures such as renal transplantation, lung transplantation, and portal vein reconstruction are routinely being performed with robotic assistance that includes major vascular anastomoses (Emerson in J Heart Lung Transplant 43:158-161, 2024; Fei in J Vasc Surg Cases Innov Tech 9, 2023; Tzvetanov in Transplantation 106:479-488, 2022; Slagter in Int J Surg 99, 2022). Handling and dissection of major vascular structures come with the inherent risk of vascular injury, perhaps the most feared complication during such robotic procedures, possibly requiring emergent vascular surgical consultation. In this review article, we describe the impact of a minimally invasive, robotic approach covering the following topics: a brief history of robotic surgery, components and benefits of the robotic system as compared to laparoscopy, current literature on "vascular" applications of the robotic system, evolving training pathways and future perspectives.

Pancreatic solid pseudopapillary tumors (SPTs) are rare clinical entity, with low malignancy and still unclear pathogenesis. They account for less than 2% of exocrine pancreatic neoplasms. This study aimed to perform a systematic review of the main clinical, surgical and oncological characteristics of pancreatic SPTs.

MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases were systematically searched for the main clinical, surgical and oncological characteristics of pancreatic SPTs up to April 2021, in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) standards. Primary endpoints were to analyze treatments and oncological outcomes.

A total of 823 studies were recorded, 86 studies underwent full-text reviews and 28 met inclusion criteria. Overall, 1384 patients underwent pancreatic surgery. Mean age was 30 years and 1181 patients (85.3%) were female. The most common clinical presentation was non-specific abdominal pain (52.6% of cases). Mean overall survival was 98.1%. Mean recurrence rate was 2.8%. Mean follow-up was 4.2 years.

Pancreatic SPTs are rare, and predominantly affect young women with unclear pathogenesis. Radical resection is the gold standard of treatment achieving good oncological impact and a favorable prognosis in a yearly life-long follow-up.

Laparoscopic pancreatic resection is comparable to open pancreatic resection; however, cost-effectiveness analyses of laparoscopic pancreatic resection are scarce. The authors performed a population-based study investigating the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic pancreatic resection versus open pancreatic resection.

Data from 9,256 patients who received pancreaticoduodenectomy (66.8%) and distal pancreatectomy (33.2%) from 2016 to 2018 were retrieved from the Korean National Health Insurance Service. Events after pancreatectomy were categorized as no complication, complication, and death. Probabilities of each event and average cost during index admission and 1 year were utilized to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, the cost difference between two interventions divided by quality-adjusted life year. Quality-adjusted life year, a function of length and quality of life, was measured with utility values determined by researching literature.

Laparoscopic pancreatic resection was performed in 12.4% of pancreaticoduodenectomies and 53.4% of distal pancreatectomies. For pancreaticoduodenectomy, laparoscopic pancreatic resection was associated with an increase of 0.0022 quality-adjusted life years for index admission and 0.0023 quality-adjusted life years for 1 year compared with open pancreatic resection. The incremental cost was $321 for index admission and -$1,414 for 1 year, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $147,429 per quality-adjusted life year gained for index admission and -$614,965 per quality-adjusted life year gained for 1 year. For distal pancreatectomy, laparoscopic pancreatic resection improved 0.0131 quality-adjusted life years for index admission and 0.0285 quality-adjusted life years for index admission. The incremental cost was -$1,240 for index admission and -$5,875 for 1 year, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of -$94,519 per quality-adjusted life year gained for index admission and -$206,351 for 1 year.

laparoscopic pancreatic resection was a cost-effective alternative to open pancreatic resection for pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy, except for the higher cost of index admission for pancreaticoduodenectomy.

With the development of robotic systems, robotic pancreatoduodenectomies (RPDs) have been increasingly performed. However, the number of cases required by surgeons with extensive laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) experience to overcome the learning curve of RPD remains unclear. Therefore, we aimed to analyze and explore the impact of different phases of the learning curve of RPD on perioperative outcomes. Clinical data were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed for 100 consecutive patients who underwent RPD performed by a single surgeon. This surgeon had previous experience with LPD, having performed 127 LPDs with low morbidity. The learning curve for RPD was analyzed using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method based on operation time, and perioperative outcomes were compared between the learning and proficiency phases. Between April 2020 and November 2022, one hundred patients (56 men, 44 women) were included in this study. Based on the CUSUM curve of operation time, the learning curve for RPD was divided into two phases: phase I was the learning phase (cases 1-33) and phase II was the proficiency phase (cases 34-100). The operation time during the proficiency phase was significantly shorter than that during the learning phase. In the learning phase of RPD, no significant increases were observed in estimated blood loss, conversion to laparotomy, severe complications, postoperative pancreatic hemorrhage, clinical pancreatic fistula, or other perioperative complications compared to the proficiency phases of either RPD or LPD. A surgeon with extensive prior experience in LPD can safely surmount the RPD learning curve without increasing morbidity in the learning phase. The proficiency was significantly improved after accumulating experience of 33 RPD cases.

The prevalence of overweight or obesity among patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy is on the rise. The utilisation of robotic assistance has the potential to enhance the feasibility of performing minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy in this particular group of patients who are at a higher risk. The objective of this meta-analysis is to assess the safety and effectiveness of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy in individuals with overweight or obesity.

This investigation will systematically search for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised comparative studies that compare robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy with open or laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with overweight or obesity, using PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library databases. The methodological quality of studies will be evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. RevMan software (V.5.4.1) will be used for statistical analysis. The OR and weighted mean differences will be calculated separately for dichotomous and continuous data. The selection of a fixed-effects or random-effects model will depend on the level of heterogeneity observed among the included studies.

This study will be conducted based on data in the published literature from publicly available databases. Therefore, ethics approval is not applicable. The results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal.

CRD42023462321.

The aim of this study is to investigate the perioperative composite textbook outcomes of pancreatic surgery after minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD).

The cohort study was conducted across 10 institutions and included 1552 patients who underwent MIPD registered with the Korean Study Group on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery between May 2007 and April 2020. We analyzed perioperative textbook outcomes of pancreatic surgery after MIPD. Subgroup analyses were performed to assess outcomes based on the hospital volume of MIPD.

Among all patients, 21.8% underwent robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. High-volume centers (performing >20 MIPD/year) performed 88.1% of the procedures. The incidence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula was 11.5%. Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa) occurred in 15.1% of the cases. The 90-day mortality rate was 0.8%. The mean hospital stay was 13.7 days. Textbook outcomes of pancreatic surgery success were achieved in 60.4% of patients, with higher rates observed in high-volume centers than in low-volume centers (62.2% vs. 44.7%, P <0.001). High-volume centers exhibited significantly lower conversion rates (5.4% vs. 12.5%, P =0.001), lower 90-day mortality (0.5% vs. 2.7%, P =0.001), and lower 90-day readmission rates (4.5% vs. 9.6%, P =0.006) than those low-volume centers.

MIPD could be performed safely with permissible perioperative outcomes, including textbook outcomes of pancreatic surgery, particularly in experienced centers. The findings of this study provided valuable insights for guiding surgical treatment decisions in periampullary disease.