Single-centre comparison of robotic and open pancreatoduodenectomy: a propensity score-matched study

被引:11
|
作者
Bencini, Lapo [1 ]
Tofani, Federica [1 ]
Paolini, Claudia [1 ]
Vaccaro, Carla [1 ]
Checcacci, Paolo [1 ]
Annecchiarico, Mario [1 ]
Moraldi, Luca [1 ]
Farsi, Marco [2 ]
Polvani, Simone [3 ]
Coratti, Andrea [1 ]
机构
[1] Careggi Univ Hosp, Surg Oncol & Robot, Florence, Italy
[2] Le Scotte Univ Hosp, Gen Surg, Siena, Italy
[3] Univ Florence, Gastroenterol Res Unit, Florence, Italy
关键词
Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy; Pancreatic surgery; Robotic surgery; INTERNATIONAL STUDY-GROUP; LAPAROSCOPIC PANCREATICODUODENECTOMY; PANCREATIC FISTULA; SURGERY; ADENOCARCINOMA; DEFINITION; OUTCOMES; CANCER;
D O I
10.1007/s00464-019-07335-3
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic head and periampullary cancers is still associated with high perioperative morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RAPD) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) performed in a high-volume centre. Methods A single-centre, prospective database was used to retrospectively compare the early outcomes of RAPD procedures to standard OPD procedures completed between January 2014 and December 2018. Of the 121 included patients, 78 underwent RAPD and 43 underwent OPD. After propensity score matching (PSM), 35 RAPD patients were matched with 35 OPD patients with similar preoperative characteristics. Results There were no statistically significant differences in most of the baseline demographics and perioperative outcomes in the two groups after PSM optimization with the exception of the operative time (530 min (RAPD) versus 335 min (OPD) post-match, p < 0.000). No differences were found between the two groups in terms of complications (including pancreatic leaks, 11.4% in both OPD and RAPD), perioperative mortality, reoperations or readmissions. Earlier refeeding was obtained in the RAPD group vs. the OPD group (3 vs. 4 days, p = 0.002). Although the differences in the length of the hospital stay and blood transfusions were not statistically significant, both parameters showed a positive trend in favour of RAPD. The number of harvested lymph nodes was similar and oncologically adequate. Conclusions RAPD is a safe and oncologically adequate technique to treat malignancies arising from the pancreatic head and periampullary region. Several perioperative parameters resulted in trends favouring RAPD over OPD, at the price of longer operating time. Data should be reinforced with a larger sample to guarantee statistical significance.
引用
下载
收藏
页码:5402 / 5412
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Minimally invasive vs open pancreatoduodenectomy on oncological adequacy: a propensity score-matched analysis
    Ashouri, Yazan
    Ho, Katherine
    Ho, Helen
    Hsu, Chiu-Hsieh
    Ghaderi, Iman
    Riall, Taylor S.
    Konstantinidis, Ioannis T.
    Maegawa, Felipe B.
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2022, 36 (10): : 7302 - 7311
  • [32] Minimally invasive vs open pancreatoduodenectomy on oncological adequacy: a propensity score-matched analysis
    Yazan Ashouri
    Katherine Ho
    Helen Ho
    Chiu-Hsieh Hsu
    Iman Ghaderi
    Taylor S. Riall
    Ioannis T. Konstantinidis
    Felipe B. Maegawa
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2022, 36 : 7302 - 7311
  • [33] Early experience with robotic pancreatoduodenectomy versus open pancreatoduodenectomy: nationwide propensity-score-matched analysis
    de Graaf, Nine
    Zwart, Maurice J. W.
    van Hilst, Jony
    van den Broek, Bram
    Bonsing, Bert A.
    Busch, Olivier R.
    Coene, Peter-Paul L. O.
    Daams, Freek
    van Dieren, Susan
    van Eijck, Casper H. J.
    Festen, Sebastiaan
    de Hingh, Ignace H. J. T.
    Lips, Daan J.
    Luyer, Misha D. P.
    Mieog, J. Sven D.
    van Santvoort, Hjalmar C.
    van der Schelling, George P.
    Stommel, Martijn W. J.
    de Wilde, Roeland F.
    Molenaar, I. Quintus
    Koerkamp, Bas Groot
    Besselink, Marc G.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2024, 111 (02)
  • [34] Robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly patients: a propensity score-matched analysis
    Mederos, Michael A.
    Starr, Savannah
    Park, Joon Y.
    King, Jonathan C.
    Tomlinson, James S.
    Donahue, Timothy R.
    Girgis, Mark D.
    HPB, 2023, 25 (03) : 301 - 310
  • [35] Robotic versus open resection of benign nonadrenal retroperitoneal tumors: A propensity score-matched study
    Liu, Qu
    Zhou, Ruiquan
    Zhao, Zhiming
    Gao, Yuanxing
    Zhao, Guodong
    Liu, Rong
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2019, 65 : 19 - 24
  • [36] Cold ischemia technique during robotic partial nephrectomy: a propensity score-matched comparison with open approach
    Garisto, Juan
    Bertolo, Riccardo
    Agudelo, Jose
    Armanyous, Sherif
    Gao, Tianming
    Lioudis, Michael
    Kaouk, Jihad H.
    MINERVA UROLOGICA E NEFROLOGICA, 2019, 71 (02) : 127 - 135
  • [37] Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: A propensity score-matched study
    Liu, Rong
    Liu, Qu
    Zhao, Zhi-Ming
    Tan, Xiang-Long
    Gao, Yuan-Xing
    Zhao, Guo-Dong
    JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2017, 116 (04) : 461 - 469
  • [38] Robotic subxiphoid thymectomy versus lateral thymectomy: a propensity score-matched comparison
    Park, Ji Hyeon
    Na, Kwon Joong
    Kang, Chang Hyun
    Park, Samina
    Park, In Kyu
    Kim, Young Tae
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CARDIO-THORACIC SURGERY, 2022, 62 (01)
  • [39] Robotic Versus Open Minor Liver Resections of the Posterosuperior Segments: A Multinational, Propensity Score-Matched Study
    Nota, Carolijn L.
    Woo, Yanghee
    Raoof, Mustafa
    Boerner, Thomas
    Molenaar, I. Quintus
    Choi, Gi Hong
    Kingham, T. Peter
    Latorre, Karen
    Rinkes, Inne H. M. Borel
    Hagendoorn, Jeroen
    Fong, Yuman
    ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2019, 26 (02) : 583 - 590
  • [40] Robotic versus open oncological gastric surgery in the elderly: a propensity score-matched analysis
    Garbarino, Giovanni Maria
    Costa, Gianluca
    Frezza, Barbara
    Biancafarina, Alessia
    Balducci, Genoveffa
    Mercantini, Paolo
    De Prizio, Marco
    Laracca, Giovanni Gugliemo
    Ceccarelli, Graziano
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2021, 15 (05) : 741 - 749