RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The REDISCOVER consensus conference aimed at developing and validating guidelines on the perioperative care of patients with borderline-resectable (BR-) and locally advanced (LA) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). BACKGROUND: Coupled with improvements in chemotherapy and radiation, the contemporary approach to pancreatic surgery supports the resection of BR-PDAC and, to a lesser extent, LA-PDAC. Guidelines outlining the selection and perioperative care for these patients are lacking. METHODS: The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used to develop the REDISCOVER guidelines and create recommendations. The Delphi approach was used to reach a consensus (agreement ≥80%) among experts. Recommendations were approved after a debate and vote among international experts in pancreatic surgery and pancreatic cancer management. A Validation Committee used the AGREE II-GRS tool to assess the methodological quality of the guidelines. Moreover, an independent multidisciplinary advisory group revised the statements to ensure adherence to nonsurgical guidelines. RESULTS: Overall, 34 recommendations were created targeting centralization, training, staging, patient selection for surgery, possibility of surgery in uncommon scenarios, timing of surgery, avoidance of vascular reconstruction, details of vascular resection/reconstruction, arterial divestment, frozen section histology of perivascular tissue, extent of lymphadenectomy, anticoagulation prophylaxis, and role of minimally invasive surgery. The level of evidence was however low for 29 of 34 clinical questions. Participants agreed that the most conducive means to promptly advance our understanding in this field is to establish an international registry addressing this patient population ( https://rediscover.unipi.it/ ). CONCLUSIONS: The REDISCOVER guidelines provide clinical recommendations pertaining to pancreatectomy with vascular resection for patients with BR-PDAC and LA-PDAC, and serve as the basis of a new international registry for this patient population.
Assuntos
Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático , Pancreatectomia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Assistência Perioperatória , Humanos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patologia , Assistência Perioperatória/normas , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirurgia , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/patologia , Técnica Delphi , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Seleção de PacientesRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Central pancreatectomy (CP) is a parenchymal-sparing technique indicated for the resection of selected lesions of the neck or proximal body of the pancreas.1,2 The risk of postoperative complications is theoretically doubled because the surgeon has to manage two cut surfaces of the pancreas. The video shows a fully robotic CP to treat a 62-year-old male patient with a mixed-type intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) of the pancreatic neck, using ultrasound (US) and Wirsung endoscopic evaluation to guide the pancreatic resection and ensure optimal resection margins. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A US-guided robotic CP was carried out, and an intraoperative endoscopic evaluation of the MPD was performed to determine the distal transection level. A transmesocolic, end-to-side, robot-sewn Wirsung-jejunostomy with internal MPD stenting was then created. The procedure was completed with a side-to-side jejunojejunostomy. RESULTS: The operative time was 290 min, with negligible blood loss. During the postoperative course, the patient experienced bleeding from a branch of the gastroduodenal artery with subsequent fluid collection, which was successfully treated with angioembolization and percutaneous drainage. He was discharged home on postoperative day 22. Final pathology revealed a non-invasive IPMN with low-grade dysplasia and free surgical margins. At 12 months of follow-up, the patient was doing well, with no evidence of local recurrence and endocrine or exocrine pancreatic insufficiency. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of robotic surgery with intraoperative US and Wirsungoscopy may offer distinct technical advantages for challenging pancreatectomies that follow the principles of parenchymal-sparing surgery.
Assuntos
Pancreatectomia , Ductos Pancreáticos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Humanos , Masculino , Pancreatectomia/métodos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/métodos , Ductos Pancreáticos/cirurgia , Ductos Pancreáticos/patologia , Ductos Pancreáticos/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patologia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias Intraductais Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Intraductais Pancreáticas/patologia , Neoplasias Intraductais Pancreáticas/diagnóstico por imagem , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirurgia , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/diagnóstico por imagem , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/patologia , Adenocarcinoma Mucinoso/cirurgia , Adenocarcinoma Mucinoso/patologia , Adenocarcinoma Mucinoso/diagnóstico por imagem , PrognósticoRESUMO
Central pancreatectomy (CP) is indicated for benign or low-grade pancreatic tumors located in the neck or proximal pancreatic body. This procedure is demanding and has a high rate of postoperative complications. Minimally invasive surgery is now commonly used for CP but it is still unclear whether the robotic approach offers any advantages over conventional pancreatic minimally invasive surgery. Most studies on robotic CP are limited to case reports or case series; however, there are two important studies on this topic. Currently, the evidence on robotic CP remains limited, making it challenging to draw definitive conclusions in favor of one technique over the other. The use of a robotic platform, with its integrated tools such as intraoperative ultrasound, can guide the surgeon in performing this technically demanding procedure in a safer manner. The controversy regarding the best minimally invasive surgery approach for CP is still ongoing and requires further research.
Assuntos
Pancreatectomia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Humanos , Pancreatectomia/métodos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/métodos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Minimamente Invasivos/métodos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , PrognósticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The double-stapled technique is the most common method of colorectal anastomosis in minimally invasive surgery. Several modifications to the conventional technique have been described aiming to reduce the intersection between the stapled lines, as the resulting lateral dog-ears are considered as possible risk factors for anastomotic leakage. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the outcomes of patients receiving conventional versus modified stapled colorectal anastomosis following minimally invasive surgery. DATA SOURCES: A systematic review was undertaken of the published literature. PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases were screened up to July 2023. STUDY SELECTION: Relevant articles were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Articles reporting on the outcomes of patients with modified stapled colorectal reconstruction as compared to the conventional method of double-stapled anastomosis were included. INTERVENTIONS: Conventional double-stapling colorectal anastomosis and modified techniques with reduced intersection between the stapled lines were compared. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The rate of anastomotic leak was the primary endpoint of interest. Perioperative details including postoperative morbidity were also appraised. RESULTS: There were 2537 patients from 12 studies included for data extraction, with no significant differences on age, body mass index and proportion of high American Society of Anesthesiologists Score between patients who had conventional versus modified techniques of reconstructions. The risk of anastomotic leak was 62% lower for the modified procedure compared to the conventional procedure (odds ratio = 0.38 [95% CI: 0.26, 0.56]. The incidences of overall postoperative morbidity (odds ratio = 0.57 [95% CI: 0.45, 0.73] and major morbidity (odds ratio = 0.48 [95% CI: 0.32, 0.72] following were significantly lower than following conventional double-stapled anastomosis. LIMITATIONS: The retrospective nature of most included studies is a main limitation, essentially due to the lack of randomization, and the risk of selection and detection bias. CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence supports the modification of the conventional double-stapled technique with elimination of one of both dog-ears as it is associated with lower incidence of anastomotic-related morbidity.
RESUMO
AIM: Ensuring an adequate distal resection margin (DRM) is a key factor in achieving the gold standard in surgical treatment for rectal surgery. The aim of this article is to describe our surgical technique and the usefulness of intraoperative ultrasonography (IOUS) for evaluating the DRM during robotic rectal surgery (RRS). METHOD: Prospective data on five consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent RRS between January 2023 and December 2023 were collected. IOUS was utilized to evaluate the DRM in all patients. RESULTS: The mean time for the IOUS examination ranged from 5 to 10 min. There were no intraoperative complications or conversions to open surgery. The median length of hospital stay was 6.4 days (±1.67 days). During hospitalization, one patient experienced a Grade II complication according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, specifically postoperative ileus. Furthermore, one patient experienced a delayed anastomotic fistula, which was conservatively treated without readmission. At definitive pathology, the median distance of the tumour from the DRM was 29 mm (±1.41 mm) and all patients had an R0 resection. CONCLUSION: IOUS is a reproducible and helpful modality for identifying the distal margin of the cutting line during robotic resection of rectal cancers. It does not affect the operating time compared with other methods and could be an alternative method for assessment of the DRM during RRS.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study is to compare outcomes of the robotic hand-sewn, linear- and circular-stapled techniques performed to create an intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis in patients who underwent Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. METHODS: Patients who underwent a planned Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy were retrospectively analysed from prospectively maintained databases. Only patients who underwent a robotic thoracic approach with the creation of an intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis were included in the study. Patients were divided into three groups: hand-sewn-, circular stapled-, and linear-stapled anastomosis group. Demographic information and surgery-related data were extracted. The primary outcome was the rate of anastomotic leakages (AL) in the three groups. Moreover, the rate of grade A, B and C anastomotic leakage were evaluated. In addition, patients of each group were divided in subgroups according to the characteristics of anastomotic fashioning technique. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty patients were enrolled in the study. No significant differences were found between the three groups about AL rate (p = 0.137). Considering the management of the AL for each of the three groups, no significant differences were found. Evaluating the correlation between AL rate and the characteristics of anastomotic fashioning technique, no significant differences were found. CONCLUSIONS: No standardized anastomotic fashioning technique has yet been generally accepted. This study could be considered a call to perform ad hoc high-quality studies involving high-volume centers for upper gastrointestinal surgery to evaluate what is the most advantageous anastomotic technique.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Esofágicas , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Humanos , Esofagectomia/métodos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/métodos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirurgia , Anastomose Cirúrgica/métodos , Fístula Anastomótica/epidemiologia , Fístula Anastomótica/cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/cirurgia , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Although minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is considered a standard approach it still presents a non-negligible rate of conversion to open that is mainly related to some difficulty factors, as obesity. The aim of this study is to analyze the preoperative factors associated with conversion in obese patients with MIDP. METHODS: In this multicenter study, all obese patients who underwent MIDP at 18 international expert centers were included. The preoperative factors associated with conversion to open surgery were analyzed. RESULTS: Out of 436 patients, 91 (20.9%) underwent conversion to open, presenting higher blood loss, longer operative time and similar rate of major complications. Twenty (22%) patients received emergent conversion. At univariate analysis, the type of approach, radiological invasion of adjacent organs, preoperative enlarged lymphnodes and ASA ≥ III were significantly associated with conversion to open. At multivariate analysis, robotic approach showed a significantly lower conversion rate (14.6 % vs 27.3%, OR = 2.380, p = 0.001). ASA ≥ III (OR = 2.391, p = 0.002) and preoperative enlarged lymphnodes (OR = 3.836, p = 0.003) were also independently associated with conversion. CONCLUSION: Conversion rate is significantly lower in patients undergoing robotic approach. Radiological enlarged lymphnodes and ASA ≥ III are also associated with conversion to open. Conversion is associated with poorer perioperative outcomes, especially in case of intraoperative hemorrhage.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To gain insight in global practice of RAMIG and evaluated perioperative outcomes using an international registry. BACKGROUND: The techniques and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive gastrectomy (RAMIG) for gastric cancer vary substantially in literature. METHODS: Prospectively registered RAMIG-cases for gastric cancer (≥10 per center) were extracted from 25 centers in Europe, Asia and South-America. Techniques for the resection, reconstruction, anastomosis and lymphadenectomy were analyzed, and related to perioperative surgical and oncological outcomes. Complications were uniformly defined by the Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group. RESULTS: Between 2020-2023, 759 patients underwent total (n=272), distal (n=465) or proximal (n=22) gastrectomy (RAMIG). After total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y-reconstruction, anastomotic leakage rates were 8% with hand-sewn (n=9/111) and 6% with linear stapled anastomoses (n=6/100). After distal gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y (67%) or Billroth-II-reconstruction (31%), anastomotic leakage rates were 3% with linear stapled (n=11/433) and 0% with hand-sewn anastomoses (n=0/26). Extent of lymphadenectomy consisted of D1+ (28%), D2 (59%) or D2+ (12%). Median nodal harvest yielded 31 nodes [IQR 21-47] after total and 34 nodes [IQR 24-47] after distal gastrectomy. R0-resection rates were 93% after total and 96% distal gastrectomy. Hospital stay was 9 days after total and distal gastrectomy, and was 3 days shorter without perianastomotic drains versus routine drain placement. Postoperative 30-day mortality was 1%. CONCLUSIONS: This large multicenter study provided a worldwide overview of current RAMIG-techniques with their respective perioperative outcomes. These outcomes demonstrated high surgical quality, set a quality standard for RAMIG and can be considered an international reference for surgical standardization.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Robotic distal pancreatectomy (DP) is an emerging attractive approach, but its role compared with laparoscopic or open surgery remains unclear. Benchmark values are novel and objective tools for such comparisons. The aim of this study was to identify benchmark cutoffs for many outcome parameters for DP with or without splenectomy beyond the learning curve. METHODS: This study analyzed outcomes from international expert centers from patients undergoing robotic DP for malignant or benign lesions. After excluding the first 10 cases in each center to reduce the effect of the learning curve, consecutive patients were included from the start of robotic DP up to June 2020. Benchmark patients had no significant comorbidities. Benchmark cutoff values were derived from the 75th or the 25th percentile of the median values of all benchmark centers. Benchmark values were compared with a laparoscopic control group from 4 high-volume centers and published open DP landmark series. RESULTS: Sixteen centers contributed 755 cases, whereof 345 benchmark patients (46%) were included the analysis. Benchmark cutoffs included: operation time ≤300 minutes, conversion rate ≤3%, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula ≤32%, 3 months major complication rate ≤26.7%, and lymph node retrieval ≥9. The comprehensive complication index at 3 months was ≤8.7 without deterioration thereafter. Compared with robotic DP, laparoscopy had significantly higher conversion rates (5×) and overall complications, while open DP was associated with more blood loss and longer hospital stay. CONCLUSION: This first benchmark study demonstrates that robotic DP provides superior postoperative outcomes compared with laparoscopic and open DP. Robotic DP may be expected to become the approach of choice in minimally invasive DP.
Assuntos
Laparoscopia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Humanos , Pancreatectomia/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Benchmarking , Padrão de Cuidado , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Laparoscopia/efeitos adversos , Tempo de Internação , Resultado do Tratamento , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Laparoscopia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Robótica , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estudos de Coortes , Pancreatectomia , Resultado do Tratamento , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patologia , Duração da Cirurgia , Tempo de Internação , Neoplasias PancreáticasRESUMO
AIM: Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is an oncologically complex operation for very low-lying rectal cancers. Yet, definition, anatomical description, operative indications and operative approaches to ISR are not standardized. The aim of this study was to standardize the definition of ISR by reaching international consensus from the experts in the field. This standardization will allow meaningful comparison in the literature in the future. METHOD: A modified Delphi approach with three rounds of questionnaire was adopted. A total of 29 international experts from 11 countries were recruited for this study. Six domains with a total of 37 statements were examined, including anatomical definition; definition of intersphincteric dissection, intersphincteric resection (ISR) and ultra-low anterior resection (uLAR); indication for ISR; surgical technique of ISR; specimen description of ISR; and functional outcome assessment protocol. RESULTS: Three rounds of questionnaire were performed (response rate 100%, 89.6%, 89.6%). Agreement (≥80%) reached standardization on 36 statements. CONCLUSION: This study provides an international expert consensus-based definition and standardization of ISR. This is the first study standardizing terminology and definition of deep pelvis/anal canal anatomy from a surgical point of view. Intersphincteric dissection, ISR and uLAR were specifically defined for precise surgical description. Indication for ISR was determined by the rectal tumour's maximal radial infiltration (T stage) below the levator ani. A new surgical definition of T3isp was reached by consensus to define T3 low rectal tumours infiltrating the intersphincteric plane. A practical flowchart for surgical indication for uLAR/ISR/abdominoperineal resection was developed. A standardized ISR surgical technique and functional outcome assessment protocol was defined.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Retais , Reto , Humanos , Consenso , Técnica Delphi , Reto/patologia , Canal Anal , Neoplasias Retais/patologia , Diafragma da Pelve , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Although robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) has a lower conversion rate to open surgery and causes less blood loss than laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), clear evidence on the impact of the surgical approach on morbidity is lacking. Prior studies have shown a higher rate of complications among obese patients undergoing pancreatectomy. The primary aim of this study is to compare short-term outcomes of RDP vs. LDP in patients with a BMI ≥ 30. METHODS: In this multicenter study, all obese patients who underwent RDP or LDP for any indication between 2012 and 2022 at 18 international expert centers were included. The baseline characteristics underwent inverse probability treatment weighting to minimize allocation bias. RESULTS: Of 446 patients, 219 (50.2%) patients underwent RDP. The median age was 60 years, the median BMI was 33 (31-36), and the preoperative diagnosis was ductal adenocarcinoma in 21% of cases. The conversion rate was 19.9%, the overall complication rate was 57.8%, and the 90-day mortality rate was 0.7% (3 patients). RDP was associated with a lower complication rate (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52-0.89; p = 0.005), less blood loss (150 vs. 200 ml; p < 0.001), fewer blood transfusion requirements (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.15-0.50; p < 0.001) and a lower Comprehensive Complications Index (8.7 vs. 8.9, p < 0.001) than LPD. RPD had a lower conversion rate (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.19-0.39; p < 0.001) and achieved better spleen preservation rate (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.13-3.39; p = 0.016) than LPD. CONCLUSIONS: In obese patients, RDP is associated with a lower conversion rate, fewer complications and better short-term outcomes than LPD.
Assuntos
Laparoscopia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Pancreatectomia , Resultado do Tratamento , Laparoscopia/efeitos adversos , Duração da Cirurgia , Tempo de Internação , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The adoption of robotic surgery for esophageal cancer has been expanding rapidly over the recent years. In the setting of two-field esophagectomy, different techniques exist for intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis, although the superiority of one over another has not been clearly demonstrated. Potential benefits in terms of anastomotic leakage and stenosis have been reported in association with a linear-stapled anastomosis as compared to the more widespread techniques of circular mechanical and hand-sewn reconstructions, however, there is still limited reported evidence on its application to robotic surgery. We here report our fully robotic technique of side-to-side, semi-mechanical anastomosis. METHODS: All consecutive patients undergoing fully robotic esophagectomy featuring intrathoracic side-to-side stapled anastomosis by a single surgical team were included in this analysis. Operative technique is detailed, and perioperative data are assessed. RESULTS: A total of 49 patients were included. There were no intraoperative complications and no conversion occurred. The rate of overall postoperative morbidity was 25, 14% being the relative rate of major complications. With anastomotic-related morbidity in particular, one patient developed minor anastomotic leakage. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience demonstrates that a linear, side-to-side fully robotic stapled anastomosis can be created with a high technical success and minimal incidence of anastomosis-related morbidity.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Esofágicas , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Humanos , Esofagectomia/efeitos adversos , Fístula Anastomótica/epidemiologia , Fístula Anastomótica/etiologia , Fístula Anastomótica/prevenção & controle , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/métodos , Resultado do Tratamento , Anastomose Cirúrgica/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias Esofágicas/complicações , Estudos Retrospectivos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/cirurgiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Most studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) combine patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancers even though there is substantial heterogeneity between these tumors. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the role of MIPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in patients with non-pancreatic periampullary cancer (NPPC). METHODS: A systematic review of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed by two independent reviewers to identify studies comparing MIPD and OPD for NPPC (ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenal adenocarcinoma) (01/2015-12/2021). Individual patient data were required from all identified studies. Primary outcomes were (90-day) mortality, and major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3a-5). Secondary outcomes were postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), blood-loss, length of hospital stay (LOS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Overall, 16 studies with 1949 patients were included, combining 928 patients with ampullary, 526 with distal cholangio, and 461 with duodenal cancer. In total, 902 (46.3%) patients underwent MIPD, and 1047 (53.7%) patients underwent OPD. The rates of 90-day mortality, major morbidity, POPF, DGE, PPH, blood-loss, and length of hospital stay did not differ between MIPD and OPD. Operation time was 67 min longer in the MIPD group (P = 0.009). A decrease in DFS for ampullary (HR 2.27, P = 0.019) and distal cholangio (HR 1.84, P = 0.025) cancer, as well as a decrease in OS for distal cholangio (HR 1.71, P = 0.045) and duodenal cancer (HR 4.59, P < 0.001) was found in the MIPD group. CONCLUSIONS: This individual patient data meta-analysis of MIPD versus OPD in patients with NPPC suggests that MIPD is not inferior in terms of short-term morbidity and mortality. Several major limitations in long-term data highlight a research gap that should be studied in prospective maintained international registries or randomized studies for ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenum cancer separately. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42021277495) on the 25th of October 2021.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Duodenais , Laparoscopia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Humanos , Pancreaticoduodenectomia/métodos , Neoplasias Duodenais/cirurgia , Estudos Prospectivos , Pâncreas/cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/cirurgia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Comparative data on D2-robotic gastrectomy (RG) vs D2-open gastrectomy (OG) are lacking in the Literature. Aim of this paper is to compare RG to OG with a focus on D2-lymphadenectomy. STUDY DESIGN: Data of patients undergoing D2-OG or RG for gastric cancer were retrieved from the international IMIGASTRIC prospective database and compared. RESULTS: A total of 1469 patients were selected for inclusion in the study. After 1:1 propensity score matching, a total of 580 patients were matched and included in the final analysis, 290 in each group, RG vs OG. RG had longer operation time (210 vs 330 min, p < 0.0001), reduced intraoperative blood loss (155 vs 119.7 ml, p < 0.0001), time to liquid diet (4.4 vs 3 days, p < 0.0001) and to peristalsis (2.4 vs 2 days, p < 0.0001), and length of postoperative stay (11 vs 8 days, p < 0.0001). Morbidity rate was higher in OG (24.1% vs 16.2%, p = 0.017). CONCLUSION: RG significantly expedites recovery and reduces the risk of complications compared to OG. However, long-term survival is similar.
Assuntos
Laparoscopia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Neoplasias Gástricas , Humanos , Pontuação de Propensão , Gastrectomia , Excisão de Linfonodo , Neoplasias Gástricas/cirurgia , Resultado do Tratamento , Estudos Retrospectivos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/cirurgiaRESUMO
Pylephlebitis is defined as a septic thrombophlebitis of the portal vein, usually secondary to infection in regions contiguous to or drained by the portal system. Although extremely uncommon in the modern era, pylephlebitis still carries an appreciable risk of severe morbidity and mortality, if unrecognized and left untreated. Herein we report the case of severe pylephlebitis in a patient with acute sigmoid diverticulitis. Although highly elusive, prompt diagnosis is crucial to ensure appropriate management and limit associated morbidity.
Assuntos
Diverticulite , Hepatopatias , Tromboflebite , Humanos , Diverticulite/complicações , Tromboflebite/diagnóstico por imagem , Tromboflebite/tratamento farmacológico , Tromboflebite/etiologia , Veia Porta/diagnóstico por imagem , Veias MesentéricasRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Laparoscopia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Humanos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/efeitos adversos , Pâncreas/cirurgia , Pancreatectomia/efeitos adversos , Pancreaticoduodenectomia/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Minimamente Invasivos , Laparoscopia/efeitos adversos , Sistema de Registros , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Isolated pancreatic metastasis from melanoma is extremely uncommon and accounts for approximately only 2% of visceral disseminations of melanoma.1-3 Interestingly, pancreatic localizations disproportionately derive from primary ocular melanoma.1,2 Despite the currently available evidence on this argument being scarce, the survival outcomes of patients receiving resection for visceral melanoma metastases are reported to be superior than those managed by non-surgical modalities.4,5 CASE PRESENTATION: A 59-year-old female with a history of uveal melanoma presented with surveillance-detected metastatic disease confined to the pancreas. Computed tomography demonstrated one lesion located in the body of the pancreas and one further lesion in the head. The presented video illustrates the details of an extended, ultrasound-guided, robotic distal pancreatectomy. DISCUSSION: Metastatic ocular melanoma has a highly variable natural history, which ranges from a fulminant course to prolonged stable disease.6 In contrast to cutaneous melanoma derivation, metastases mostly occur via hematogenous spread, in the absence of lymphatic drainage of the eye.6,7 Liver is the most common site of secondary localization and is not involved by metastatic disease in <10% of cases. Interestingly, patients with extrahepatic metastases tend to have significantly better survival rates than those with hepatic disease.6,7 Fewer than 100 cases of pancreatic metastasis from malignant melanoma are reported in the medical literature, including a relatively high percentage of primary ocular malignancies.1,5 Furthermore, the prognosis of these patients is essentially unknown, although metastatic melanoma of both cutaneous and ocular origin generally indicates poor survival.1,5,6 Although no robust evidence is available, a number of reports suggest that pancreatic resection may improve survival in these patients.1-4 A large retrospective review investigating the association between treatment modalities and survival of patients with abdominal visceral melanoma metastases showed that patients receiving resection had a superior median survival compared with patients treated medically. Although patients with metastases of the gastrointestinal tract showed the best outcomes following surgery, patients with pancreas metastasis (of both cutaneous and ocular origin) undergoing resection also exhibited a significant survival advantage compared with those treated non-surgically.5 Minimally invasive pancreatectomy is gaining momentum.8 In fact, in selected patients there are distinct advantages compared with conventional surgery owing to reduced postoperative morbidity and earlier return to daily activities, while maintaining the oncological tenets of resection.8-10 Recent reports suggest that the application of robots may provide some advantages over conventional laparoscopy, especially for patients necessitating technically challenging surgeries.8,11 Such benefits are mainly in relation to the rate of conversion, length of postoperative hospital stay, and number of cases necessary to surmount the learning curve and reach optimal performance; however, no definitive conclusions can be drawn due to the lack of high-level evidence.8,10.
Assuntos
Melanoma , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Robótica , Neoplasias Cutâneas , Feminino , Humanos , Melanoma/patologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pancreatectomia/métodos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/secundário , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Cutâneas/cirurgia , Ultrassonografia de Intervenção , Neoplasias UveaisRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Benchmarking is the process to used assess the best achievable results and compare outcomes with that standard. This study aimed to assess best achievable outcomes in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (MIDPS). METHODS: This retrospective study included consecutive patients undergoing MIDPS for any indication, between 2003 and 2019, in 31 European centres. Benchmarks of the main clinical outcomes were calculated according to the Achievable Benchmark of Care (ABC™) method. After identifying independent risk factors for severe morbidity and conversion, risk-adjusted ABCs were calculated for each subgroup of patients at risk. RESULTS: A total of 1595 patients were included. The ABC was 2.5 per cent for conversion and 8.4 per cent for severe morbidity. ABC values were 160â min for duration of operation time, 8.3 per cent for POPF, 1.8 per cent for reoperation, and 0 per cent for mortality. Multivariable analysis showed that conversion was associated with male sex (OR 1.48), BMI exceeding 30â kg/m2 (OR 2.42), multivisceral resection (OR 3.04), and laparoscopy (OR 2.24). Increased risk of severe morbidity was associated with ASA fitness grade above II (OR 1.60), multivisceral resection (OR 1.88), and robotic approach (OR 1.87). CONCLUSION: The benchmark values obtained using the ABC method represent optimal outcomes from best achievable care, including low complication rates and zero mortality. These benchmarks should be used to set standards to improve patient outcomes.
Assuntos
Laparoscopia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Benchmarking , Humanos , Laparoscopia/métodos , Masculino , Pancreatectomia/métodos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/cirurgia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Esplenectomia , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
PURPOSE: Minimally invasive surgery has been universally accepted as a valid option for the treatment of diverticular disease, provided specific expertise is available. Over the last decade, there has been a growing interest in the application of robotic approaches for diverticular disease. We aimed at evaluating whether robotic colectomy may offer some advantages over the laparoscopic approach for surgical treatment of diverticular disease by meta-analyzing the available data from the medical literature. METHODS: The PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and Web Of Sciences electronic databases were searched for literature up to December 2020. Inclusion criteria considered all comparative studies evaluating robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy for diverticulitis eligible. The conversion rate to the open approach was evaluated as the primary outcome. RESULTS: The data of 4177 patients from nine studies were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics. Patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy compared to those who underwent surgery with a robotic approach had a significantly higher risk of conversion into an open procedure (12.5% vs. 7.4%, p < 0.00001) and abbreviated hospital stay (p < 0.0001) at the price of a longer operating time (p < 0.00001). CONCLUSION: Compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery, the robotic approach offers significant advantages in terms of conversion rate and shortened hospital stay for the treatment of diverticular disease. However, because of the lack of available evidence, it is impossible to draw definitive conclusions.