Robotic Dual-Console Distal Pancreatectomy: Could it be Considered a Safe Approach and Surgical Teaching even in Pancreatic Surgery? A Retrospective Observational Study Cohort.

BACKGROUND: The study aims to assess the safety and feasibility of the robotic dual-console during a robotic distal pancreatectomy METHODS: The data of the consecutive patients submitted to RDP from 2012 to 2019 at the Verona University were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. The patients submitted to RDP were divided into the dual-console platform group (DG) and compared to the standard robotic procedure group (SG). RESULTS: In the study period, 102 robotic distal pancreatectomies were performed, of whom 42 patients (41%) belonged to the DG and 60 patients (59%) to the SG. Higher operation time was recorded in the DG compared to the SG (410 vs. 265 min, p < 0.001). The overall conversion rate of the series was 7% (n 7 patients). All the conversions were observed in the SG (p = 0.021). No differences in morbidity or pancreatic fistula rate were recorded (p > 0.05). No mortality events in the 90th postoperative days were reported in this series. CONCLUSIONS: The robotic dual-console approach for distal pancreatectomy is safe, feasible, and reproducible. The postoperative surgical outcomes are comparable to the standard RDP with the single-console da Vinci Surgical System®. This surgical technique can widely and safely improve the robotic surgical training program.

Hypofractionated Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy With Simultaneous Integrated Boost and Simultaneous Integrated Protection in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

AIMS: To evaluate the safety and feasibility of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) and simultaneous integrated protection (SIP) in borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients receiving SBRT following induction chemotherapy from January 2017 to December 2018 were included in this observational analysis. SBRT was delivered in five consecutive daily fractions by administering 30 Gy to the planning target volume while simultaneously delivering a 50 Gy SIB to the tumour-vessel interface. SIP was created by lowering the dose to 25 Gy on the overlap area between the planning target volume and the planning organ at risk volume. The primary end point was acute and late gastrointestinal grade ≥3 toxicity. Secondary end points were freedom from local progression, overall survival and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Fifty-nine consecutive patients (27 borderline resectable and 32 locally advanced) were included. Fifty-eight patients (98.3%) completed the SBRT planned treatment and 35 patients (59.4%) received surgical resection following SBRT. No acute or late grade ≥3 SBRT-related adverse events were observed. The median follow-up time was 15.1 months in the overall cohort and 18.1 months in censored patients. One- and 2-year freedom from local progression rates were 85% and 80% versus 79.7% and 60.6% in resected and unresected patients, respectively (P = 0.33). The median overall survival and PFS were 30.2 months and 19 months from diagnosis and 19.1 months and 10.7 months from SBRT in the entire cohort. Resected patients had improved 2-year overall survival rates (72.5% versus 49%, P = 0.012) and median PFS (13 months versus 5 months; P < 0.001) relative to unresected patients. There was no survival difference between borderline resectable and locally advanced patients. CONCLUSIONS: SBRT with SIB/SIP had an excellent toxicity profile and could be administered safely on pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients, even in a total neoadjuvant setting.