Transduodenal robotic ampullectomy: tips and tricks and strategies for postoperative duodenal fistula management (with video).

Transduodenal Ampullectomy (TA) is a procedure for resecting low-malignancy ampullary tumors, with postoperative fistula as a notable complication. This study aims to clarify the indications for TA, outline the surgical robotic technique, and emphasize the importance of comprehensive complication management alongside the surgical approach. This multimedia article provides a detailed exposition of the robotic TA surgical technique, including the most important steps involved in exposing and reimplanting biliary and pancreatic ducts. The procedure encompasses the mobilization of the hepatic flexure of the colon, an extensive Kocher maneuver for duodenal mobilization, and ampulla exposure through a duodenal incision. Employing retraction loop sutures enhances surgical field visibility. Reconstruction involves securing pancreatic and biliary ducts to the duodenal mucosa, each tutored with a silicon catheter, and suturing for ampullectomy completion. The total operative time was 380 min. Final histopathology disclosed high-grade dysplasia with an isolated focus of adenocarcinoma (pT1), accompanied by clear resection margins. A postoperative duodenal fistula occurred, managed successfully through conservative treatment, utilizing subcutaneous drainage. Despite accurate robotic TA execution, complications may arise. This study underscores the importance of a comprehensive approach, incorporating meticulous surgical technique and effective complication management, to optimize patient outcomes.

Robotic Approach for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma IIIA Type: Step-by-Step Procedure.

BACKGROUND: Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma is a challenging technique to be performed by minimally invasive approach being the type III among the most complex procedure. Nowadays, the robotic approach is gaining increasing interest among the surgical community, and more and more series describing robotic liver resection have been reported. However, few cases of minimally invasive Bismuth type IIIA cholangiocarcinoma have been reported. Robotic approach allows for a better dissection and suture thanks to the flexible and precise instruments movements, overcoming some of the limitations of the laparoscopic technique. Therefore, robotic technique can facilitate some of the critical steps of a technically demanding procedure, such as the extended right hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma Bismuth IIIA type. METHODS: In this multimedia video we describe, for the first time in the literature, a full robotic surgical step-by-step technique with some tips and tricks for treating a perihilar cholangiocarcinoma Bismuth IIIA type, performing a radical extended right hemihepatectomy, including segment I combined with regional lymphadenectomy anf left bile duct reconstruction. A 55-year-old woman with obstructive jaundice (10 mg/dl) was referred to our center. The endobiliary brushing confirmed adenocarcinoma, and MRI/CT showed a focal perihilar lesion of 2 cm, including the main biliary duct bifurcation and extending up to the right duct (Bismuth Type IIIA hilar cholangiocarcinoma). After endoscopic biliary stents placement and 6 weeks after right portal vein embolization, the future liver remnant, including segments II and III, reached an enough hypertrophy volume with a ratio of 30%. A right hemihepatectomy with caudate lobe, including standard standard lymphadenectomy and left biliary duct reconstruction was performed. RESULTS: The operation lasted 670 min with an estimated blood loss of 350 ml. Postoperative pathological examination revealed a moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma pT1N0 with 15 retrieved nodes and free margins. The patient experienced a type A biliary fistula and was discharged on the 21st postoperative day without abdominal drainage. CONCLUSIONS: Through the tips and tricks presented in this multimedia article, we show the advantages of the robotic approach for performing correctly one of the most complex surgeries.1-7.

Repeated pancreatic resection for pancreatic metastases from renal cell Carcinoma: A Spanish multicenter study (PANMEKID).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Recurrent isolated pancreatic metastasis from Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) after pancreatic resection is rare. The purpose of our study is to describe a series of cases of relapse of pancreatic metastasis from renal cancer in the pancreatic remnant and its surgical treatment with a repeated pancreatic resection, and to analyse the results of both overall and disease-free survival. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective study of patients undergoing pancreatic resection for RCC pancreatic metastases, from January 2010 to May 2020. Patients were grouped into two groups depending on whether they received a single pancreatic resection (SPS) or iterative pancreatic resection. Data on short and long-term outcome after pancreatic resection were collected. RESULTS: The study included 131 pancreatic resections performed in 116 patients. Thus, iterative pancreatic surgery (IPS) was performed in 15 patients. The mean length of time between the first pancreatic surgery and the second was 48.9 months (95 % CI: 22.2-56.9). There were no differences in the rate of postoperative complications. The DFS rates at 1, 3 and 5 years were 86 %, 78 % and 78 % vs 75 %, 50 % and 37 % in the IPS and SPS group respectively (p = 0.179). OS rates at 1, 3, 5 and 7 years were 100 %, 100 %, 100 % and 75 % in the IPS group vs 95 %, 85 %, 80 % and 68 % in the SPS group (p = 0.895). CONCLUSION: Repeated pancreatic resection in case of relapse of pancreatic metastasis of RCC in the pancreatic remnant is justified, since it achieves OS results similar to those obtained after the first resection.

Levels of Robotic Mesopancreas Dissection According to Malignancy and Vascular Anatomy: What Surgeons Need to Know.

INTRODUCTION: The robotic approach is attracting increasing interest among the surgical community, and more and more series describing robotic pancreatoduodenectomy have been reported. Thus, surgeons performing robotic pancreatoduodenectomy should be confident with this critical step's potential scenarios. MATERIALS AND METHODS: According to Yosuke et al., there are three different levels of mesopancreas dissection. We describe the main steps for a safe mesopancreas dissection by robotic approach. RESULTS: This multimedia article provides, for the first time in literature, a comprehensive step-by-step overview of the mesopancreas dissection during robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and its three different levels according to tumor type. CONCLUSIONS: Through the tips and indications presented in this multimedia article, we aim to familiarize surgeons with the mesopancreas dissections levels according to type of malignancy and vascular anatomy.

Factors affecting overall survival and disease-free survival after surgery for hepatocellular carcinoma: a nomogram-based prognostic model-a Western European multicenter study.

Few studies have assessed the clinical implications of the combination of different prognostic indicators for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of resected hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic factors in HCC patients for OS and DFS outcomes and establish a nomogram-based prognostic model to predict the DFS of HCC. A multicenter, retrospective European study was conducted through the collection of data on 413 consecutive treated patients with a first diagnosis of HCC between January 2010 and December 2020. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify all independent risk factors for OS and DFS outcomes. A nomogram prognostic staging model was subsequently established for DFS and its precision was verified internally by the concordance index (C-Index) and externally by calibration curves. For OS, multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated Child-Pugh B7 score (HR 4.29; 95% CI 1.74-10.55; p = 0.002) as an independent prognostic factor, along with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage ≥ B (HR 1.95; 95% CI 1.07-3.54; p = 0.029), microvascular invasion (MVI) (HR 2.54; 95% CI 1.38-4.67; p = 0.003), R1/R2 resection margin (HR 1.57; 95% CI 0.85-2.90; p = 0.015), and Clavien-Dindo Grade 3 or more (HR 2.73; 95% CI 1.44-5.18; p = 0.002). For DFS, multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated BCLC stage ≥ B (HR 2.15; 95% CI 1.34-3.44; p = 0.002) as an independent prognostic factor, along with multiple nodules (HR 2.04; 95% CI 1.25-3.32; p = 0.004), MVI (HR 1.81; 95% CI 1.19-2.75; p = 0.005), satellite nodules (HR 1.63; 95% CI 1.09-2.45; p = 0.018), and R1/R2 resection margin (HR 3.39; 95% CI 2.19-5.25; < 0.001). The C-Index of the nomogram, tailored based on the previous significant factors, showed good accuracy (0.70). Internal and external calibration curves for the probability of DFS rate showed optimal consistency and fit well between the nomogram-based prediction and actual observations. MVI and R1/R2 resection margins should be considered as significant OS and DFS predictors, while satellite nodules should be included as a significant DFS predictor. The nomogram-based prognostic model for DFS provides a more effective prognosis assessment for resected HCC patients, allowing for individualized treatment plans.

Individualization of the best approach for adhesive small bowel obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic postoperatives outcomes in adhesiolysis are promising but conversion and morbidity remains high. The objective of our study was to determine preoperative factors to individualize and select the most appropriate approach for each patient. METHODS: Patients ≥18 years old undergoing emergent surgery for adhesive small bowel obstruction and internal hernias were evaluated. Bivariate and multivariate analysis were performed to investigate factors related to conversion to open surgery and to the type of adhesions. RESULTS: Of 333 patients, 224 were operated by laparotomy and 109 by laparoscopy (conversion rate: 40%). Previous abdominal wall mesh, type of adhesions, bowel lesion, need for intestinal resection and laparoscopic skills were statistically related to conversion. In the multivariate analysis, complex adhesions (OR 4.3, 95% CI 1.5-12.2; P = 0.006), the need for intestinal resection (OR 14.16, 95% CI 2.55-78.68; P = 0.002), and non-advanced laparoscopy surgeons (OR 4.31, 95% CI 1.56-11.94; P = 0.005) were independent factors for conversion to open surgery. ASA III-IV, previous surgeries, previous abdominal mesh and previous adhesiolysis were related to complex adhesions. Previous laparoscopic surgery and internal hernia or closed loop in computed tomography were associated with simple adhesions as a cause of the obstruction. In the multivariate, previous adhesiolysis (OR 4.76, 95% CI 1.23-18.3; P = 0.023) and the findings on computed tomography were significantly related with the type of adhesion. CONCLUSION: Some preoperative factors allow to individualize the surgical approach in the adhesive small bowel obstruction improving surgical outcomes.

Learning Curves of Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy in Experienced Pancreatic Centers.

Importance: Understanding the learning curve of a new complex surgical technique helps to reduce potential patient harm. Current series on the learning curve of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) are mostly small, single-center series, thus providing limited data. Objective: To evaluate the length of pooled learning curves of MIDP in experienced centers. Design, Setting, and Participants: This international, multicenter, retrospective cohort study included MIDP procedures performed from January 1, 2006, through June 30, 2019, in 26 European centers from 8 countries that each performed more than 15 distal pancreatectomies annually, with an overall experience exceeding 50 MIDP procedures. Consecutive patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic distal pancreatectomy for all indications were included. Data were analyzed between September 1, 2021, and May 1, 2022. Exposures: The learning curve for MIDP was estimated by pooling data from all centers. Main Outcomes and Measures: The learning curve was assessed for the primary textbook outcome (TBO), which is a composite measure that reflects optimal outcome, and for surgical mastery. Generalized additive models and a 2-piece linear model with a break point were used to estimate the learning curve length of MIDP. Case mix-expected probabilities were plotted and compared with observed outcomes to assess the association of changing case mix with outcomes. The learning curve also was assessed for the secondary outcomes of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, conversion to open rate, and postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B/C. Results: From a total of 2610 MIDP procedures, the learning curve analysis was conducted on 2041 procedures (mean [SD] patient age, 58 [15.3] years; among 2040 with reported sex, 1249 were female [61.2%] and 791 male [38.8%]). The 2-piece model showed an increase and eventually a break point for TBO at 85 procedures (95% CI, 13-157 procedures), with a plateau TBO rate at 70%. The learning-associated loss of TBO rate was estimated at 3.3%. For conversion, a break point was estimated at 40 procedures (95% CI, 11-68 procedures); for operation time, at 56 procedures (95% CI, 35-77 procedures); and for intraoperative blood loss, at 71 procedures (95% CI, 28-114 procedures). For postoperative pancreatic fistula, no break point could be estimated. Conclusion and Relevance: In experienced international centers, the learning curve length of MIDP for TBO was considerable with 85 procedures. These findings suggest that although learning curves for conversion, operation time, and intraoperative blood loss are completed earlier, extensive experience may be needed to master the learning curve of MIDP.

Preliminary evaluation of the safety and efficacy of glucose solution infusion through the hepatic artery on irreversible electroporation focusing.

Due to electrical features of the tissue, such as impedance, which have a significant impact on irreversible electroporation (IRE) function, the administration of glucose solution 5% (GS5%) through the hepatic artery would focus IRE on scattered liver tumors. By creating a differential impedance between healthy and tumor tissue. This study aimed to determine the effects of the GS5% protocol on healthy liver tissue and its safety. 21 male Athymic nude rats Hsd: RH-Foxn1mu were used in the study. Animals were split into two groups. In group 1, a continuous infusion through the gastroduodenal artery of GS5% was performed to measure the impedance with a dose of 0.008 mL/g for 16 min. In group 2, the animals were divided into two subgroups for infusions of GS5%. Group 2.1, at 0.008 mL/g for 16 min. Group 2.2 at 0.03 mL/g for 4 min. Blood samples were collected after anesthesia has been induced. The second sample, after catheterization of the artery, and the third after the GS5% infusion. All the animals were sacrificed to collect histological samples. The survival rate during the experiment was 100%. A considerable impact on the impedance of the tissue was noticed, on average up to 4.31 times more than the baseline, and no side effects were observed after GS5% infusion. In conclusion, impedance alteration by Glucose solution infusion may focus IRE on tumor tissue and decrease IRE's effects on healthy tissue.

Is occlusion of the main pancreatic duct by thermal ablation really safe? A surgical innovation assessed according to IDEAL recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: Pre-clinical studies suggest that thermal ablation of the main pancreatic duct (TAMPD) is more recommendable than glue for reducing postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). Our aims were (1) to analyze the changes in the pancreas of patients after TAMPD and (2) to correlate the clinical findings with those obtained from a study on an animal model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective early feasibility study of a marketed device for a novel clinical application was carried out on a small number of subjects (n = 8) in whom TAMPD was conducted to manage the pancreatic stump after a pancreatectoduodenectomy (PD). Morphological changes in the remaining pancreas were assessed by computed tomography for 365 days after TAMPD. RESULTS: All the patients showed either Grade A or B POPF, which generally resolved within the first 30 days. The duct's maximum diameter significantly increased after TAMPD from 1.5 ± 0.8 mm to 8.6 ± 2.9 mm after 7 days (p = .025) and was then reduced to 2.6 ± 0.8 mm after 365 days PO (p < .0001). The animal model suggests that TAMPD induces dilation of the duct lumen by enzymatic digestion of ablated tissue after a few days and complete exocrine atrophy after a few weeks. CONCLUSIONS: TAMPD leads to long-term exocrine pancreatic atrophy by completely occluding the duct. However, the ductal dilatation that occurred soon after TAMPD could even favor POPF, which suggests that TAMPD should be conducted several weeks before PD, ideally by digestive endoscopy.

Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized trials.

OBJECTIVE: Assessment of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is scarce and limited to non-randomized studies. This study aimed to compare oncological and surgical outcomes after MIPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for patients after resectable PDAC from published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: A systematic review was performed to identify RCTs comparing MIPD and OPD including PDAC (Jan 2015-July 2021). Individual data of patients with PDAC were requested. Primary outcomes were R0 rate and lymph node yield. Secondary outcomes were blood-loss, operation time, major complications, hospital stay and 90-day mortality. RESULTS: Overall, 4 RCTs (all addressed laparoscopic MIPD) with 275 patients with PDAC were included. In total, 128 patients underwent laparoscopic MIPD and 147 patients underwent OPD. The R0 rate (risk difference(RD) -1%, P = 0.740) and lymph node yield (mean difference(MD) +1.55, P = 0.305) were comparable between laparoscopic MIPD and OPD. Laparoscopic MIPD was associated with less perioperative blood-loss (MD -91ml, P = 0.026), shorter length of hospital stay (MD -3.8 days, P = 0.044), while operation time was longer (MD +98.5 min, P = 0.003). Major complications (RD -11%, P = 0.302) and 90-day mortality (RD -2%, P = 0.328) were comparable between laparoscopic MIPD and OPD. CONCLUSIONS: This individual patient data meta-analysis of MIPD versus OPD in patients with resectable PDAC suggests that laparoscopic MIPD is non-inferior regarding radicality, lymph node yield, major complications and 90-day mortality and is associated with less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and longer operation time. The impact on long-term survival and recurrence should be studied in RCTs including robotic MIPD.

Use and outcome of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery in the European E-MIPS registry.

BACKGROUND: The European registry for minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (E-MIPS) collects data on laparoscopic and robotic MIPS in low- and high-volume centers across Europe. METHODS: Analysis of the first year (2019) of the E-MIPS registry, including minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) and minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD). Primary outcome was 90-day mortality. RESULTS: Overall, 959 patients from 54 centers in 15 countries were included, 558 patients underwent MIDP and 401 patients MIPD. Median volume of MIDP was 10 (7-20) and 9 (2-20) for MIPD. Median use of MIDP was 56.0% (IQR 39.0-77.3%) and median use of MIPD 27.7% (IQR 9.7-45.3%). MIDP was mostly performed laparoscopic (401/558, 71.9%) and MIPD mostly robotic (234/401, 58.3%). MIPD was performed in 50/54 (89.3%) centers, of which 15/50 (30.0%) performed ≥20 MIPD annually. This was 30/54 (55.6%) centers and 13/30 (43%) centers for MIPD respectively. Conversion rate was 10.9% for MIDP and 8.4% for MIPD. Overall 90 day mortality was 1.1% (n = 6) for MIDP and 3.7% (n = 15) for MIPD. CONCLUSION: Within the E-MIPS registry, MIDP is performed in about half of all patients, mostly using laparoscopy. MIPD is performed in about a quarter of patients, slightly more often using the robotic approach. A minority of centers met the Miami guideline volume criteria for MIPD.

Robot-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy in Patients with Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: An International, Retrospective, Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RDP) is increasingly used as an alternative to laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer but comparative multicenter studies confirming the safety and efficacy of RDP are lacking. METHODS: An international, multicenter, retrospective, cohort study, including consecutive patients undergoing RDP and LDP for resectable pancreatic cancer in 33 experienced centers from 11 countries (2010-2019). The primary outcome was R0-resection. Secondary outcomes included lymph node yield, major complications, conversion rate, and overall survival. RESULTS: In total, 542 patients after minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy were included: 103 RDP (19%) and 439 LDP (81%). The R0-resection rate was comparable (75.7% RDP vs. 69.3% LDP, p = 0.404). RDP was associated with longer operative time (290 vs. 240 min, p < 0.001), more vascular resections (7.6% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.030), lower conversion rate (4.9% vs. 17.3%, p = 0.001), more major complications (26.2% vs. 16.3%, p = 0.019), improved lymph node yield (18 vs. 16, p = 0.021), and longer hospital stay (10 vs. 8 days, p = 0.001). The 90-day mortality (1.9% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.268) and overall survival (median 28 vs. 31 months, p = 0.599) did not differ significantly between RDP and LDP, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, RDP and LDP provide a comparable R0-resection rate and overall survival in experienced centers. Although the lymph node yield and conversion rate appeared favorable after RDP, LDP was associated with shorter operating time, less major complications, and shorter hospital stay. The specific benefits associated with each approach should be confirmed by multicenter, randomized trials.

Clinical Guideline on Perioperative Management of Patients with Advanced Chronic Liver Disease.

(1) Background: Patients with advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD) are living longer with more comorbidities because of improved medical and surgical management. However, patients with ACLD are at increased risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality; (2) Methods: We conducted a comprehensive review of the literature to support a narrative clinical guideline about the assessment of mortality risk and management of perioperative morbidity in patients with ACLD undergoing surgical procedures; (3) Results: Slight data exist to guide the perioperative management of patients with ACLD, and most recommendations are based on case series and expert opinion. The severity of liver dysfunction, portal hypertension, cardiopulmonary and renal comorbidities, and complexity of surgery and type (elective versus emergent) are predictors of perioperative morbidity and mortality. Expert multidisciplinary teams are necessary to evaluate and manage ACLD before, during, and after surgical procedures; (4) Conclusions: This clinical practice document updates the available data and recommendations to optimize the management of patients with advanced chronic liver disease who undergo surgical procedures.

Minimally invasive pancreatic anastomosis after pancreaticoduodenectomy: multi-institutional step by step video description of the technique.

Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is attracting increased interest in the pancreatic surgical community with more and more teams reporting their experience worldwide. The pancreatic anastomosis (PA) is one of the key steps and challenging manoeuvre of this procedure. Since the introduction of the minimally invasive approach for PD, several PA types have been proposed, ranging from high to low complexity, but none of them have been proven unequivocally superior to the others. Therefore, definitive consensus has not been reached yet. In the present multimedia manuscript, we report the most commonly adopted minimally invasive PA and we propose a "complexity classification" to guide the choice accordingly to different characteristics of the pancreatic stump. We describe five possible different PA that might be tailored to each different case, depending mainly on texture of pancreatic stump (soft/hard, lean/fatty) and the size and visibility of main duct. This manuscript presents a step-by-step portfolio of the most commonly used mini-invasive PA. This technique requires experience in pancreatic surgery and advanced minimally invasive skills. Knowledge of and proficiency in different types of PA could help reducing the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula.

Superior Mesenteric Artery First Approach for Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Step-By-Step Surgical Technique Video.

INTRODUCTION: In the past decade, minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy has been gaining interest. However, minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy remains technically challenging and is associated with a steep learning curve. Additionally, the operating surgeon should be cognizant of replicating the same oncological steps as observed in the typical open approach. In view of this, there exist various maneuvers that are designed to achieve negative margins and a safer mesopancreatic dissection. One of these techniques is the superior mesenteric artery first approach, which is garnering interest among pancreatic surgeons. MATERIAL AND METHODS: According to existing literature, there are several superior mesenteric artery dissections approaches. We describes 5 different minimally invasive approaches. RESULTS: This multimedia manuscript provide, for the first time in literature, a comprehensive step-by-step overview of the superior mesenteric artery first approach for minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy by a team of expert surgeons from various international institutions. CONCLUSIONS: Through the tips and indications presented in this article, we aim to guide the choice of this approach according to tumor location, type of minimally invasive approach and the operating surgeon's experience and increase familiarity with such a complex procedure.