Recommendations on Robotic Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery. The Paris Jury-Based Consensus Conference.

OBJECTIVE: To establish the first consensus guidelines on the safety and indications of robotics in Hepato-Pancreatic-Biliary (HPB) surgery. The secondary aim was to identify priorities for future research. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: HPB robotic surgery is reaching the IDEAL 2b exploration phase for innovative technology. An objective assessment endorsed by the HPB community is timely and needed. METHODS: The ROBOT4HPB conference developed consensus guidelines using the Zurich-Danish model. An impartial and multidisciplinary jury produced unbiased guidelines based on the work of ten expert panels answering predefined key questions and considering the best-quality evidence retrieved after a systematic review. The recommendations conformed with the GRADE and SIGN50 methodologies. RESULTS: Fifty-four experts from 20 countries considered 285 studies, and the conference included an audience of 220 attendees. The jury (n=10) produced recommendations or statements covering five sections of robotic HPB surgery: technology, training and expertise, outcome assessment, and liver and pancreatic procedures. The recommendations supported the feasibility of robotics for most HPB procedures and its potential value in extending minimally invasive indications, emphasizing however the importance of expertise to ensure safety. The concept of expertise was defined broadly, encompassing requirements for credentialing HPB robotics at a given center. The jury prioritized relevant questions for future trials and emphasized the need for prospective registries, including validated outcome metrics for the forthcoming assessment of HPB robotics. CONCLUSION: The ROBOT4HPB consensus represents a collaborative and multidisciplinary initiative, defining state-of-the-art expertise in HPB robotics procedures. It produced the first guidelines to encourage their safe use and promotion.

Propensity Score-Matching Analysis Comparing Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Limited Liver Resections of the Posterosuperior Segments: An International Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic limited liver resections (RLLR) versus laparoscopic limited liver resections (LLLR) of the posterosuperior segments. BACKGROUND: Both laparoscopic and robotic liver resections have been used for tumors in the posterosuperior liver segments. However, the comparative performance and safety of both approaches have not been well examined in the existing literature. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter database of 5446 patients who underwent RLLR or LLLR of the posterosuperior segments (I, IVa, VII, and VIII) at 60 international centers between 2008 and 2021. Data on baseline demographics, center experience and volume, tumor features, and perioperative characteristics were collected and analyzed. Propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis (in both 1:1 and 1:2 ratios) was performed to minimize selection bias. RESULTS: A total of 3510 cases met the study criteria, of whom 3049 underwent LLLR (87%), and 461 underwent RLLR (13%). After PSM (1:1: and 1:2), RLLR was associated with a lower open conversion rate [10 of 449 (2.2%) vs 54 of 898 (6.0%); P =0.002], less blood loss [100 mL [IQR: 50-200) days vs 150 mL (IQR: 50-350); P <0.001] and a shorter operative time (188 min (IQR: 140-270) vs 222 min (IQR: 158-300); P <0.001]. These improved perioperative outcomes associated with RLLR were similarly seen in a subset analysis of patients with cirrhosis-lower open conversion rate [1 of 136 (0.7%) vs 17 of 272 (6.2%); P =0.009], less blood loss [100 mL (IQR: 48-200) vs 160 mL (IQR: 50-400); P <0.001], and shorter operative time [190 min (IQR: 141-258) vs 230 min (IQR: 160-312); P =0.003]. Postoperative outcomes in terms of readmission, morbidity and mortality were similar between RLLR and LLLR in both the overall PSM cohort and cirrhosis patient subset. CONCLUSIONS: RLLR for the posterosuperior segments was associated with superior perioperative outcomes in terms of decreased operative time, blood loss, and open conversion rate when compared with LLLR.

Defining Global Benchmarks for Laparoscopic Right Posterior Sectionectomy/H67: An International Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to establish global benchmark outcomes indicators for L-RPS/H67. BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive liver resections has seen an increase in uptake in recent years. Over time, challenging procedures as laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomies (L-RPS)/H67 are also increasingly adopted. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter database of 854 patients undergoing minimally invasive RPS (MI-RPS) in 57 international centers in 4 continents between 2015 and 2021. There were 651 pure L-RPS and 160 robotic RPS (R-RPS). Sixteen outcome indicators of low-risk L-RPS cases were selected to establish benchmark cutoffs. The 75th percentile of individual center medians for a given outcome indicator was set as the benchmark cutoff. RESULTS: There were 573 L-RPS/H67 performed in 43 expert centers, of which 254 L-RPS/H67 (44.3%) cases qualified as low risk benchmark cases. The benchmark outcomes established for operation time, open conversion rate, blood loss ≥500 mL, blood transfusion rate, postoperative morbidity, major morbidity, 90-day mortality and textbook outcome after L-RPS were 350.8 minutes, 12.5%, 53.8%, 22.9%, 23.8%, 2.8%, 0% and 4% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The present study established the first global benchmark values for L-RPS/H6/7. The benchmark provided an up-to-date reference of best achievable outcomes for surgical auditing and benchmarking.

Propensity Score-matched Analysis Comparing Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Minor Liver Resections of the Anterolateral Segments: an International Multi-center Study of 10,517 Cases.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of robotic minor liver resections (RMLR) versus laparoscopic (L) MLR of the anterolateral segments. BACKGROUND: Robotic liver surgery has been gaining prominence over the years with increasing usage for a myriad of hepatic resections. Robotic liver resections(RLR) has demonstrated non-inferiority to laparoscopic(L)LR while illustrating advantages over conventional laparoscopy especially for technically difficult and major LR. However, the advantage of RMLR for the anterolateral(AL) (segments II, III, IVb, V and VI) segments, has not been clearly demonstrated. METHODS: Between 2008 to 2022, 15,356 of 29,861 patients from 68 international centres underwent robotic(R) or laparoscopic minor liver resections (LMLR) for the AL segments Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed for matched analysis. RESULTS: 10,517 patients met the study criteria of which 1,481 underwent RMLR and 9,036 underwent LMLR. A PSM cohort of 1,401 patients in each group were identified for analysis. Compared to the LMLR cohort, the RMLR cohort demonstrated significantly lower median blood loss (75ml vs. 100ml, P<0.001), decreased blood transfusion (3.1% vs. 5.4%, P=0.003), lower incidence of major morbidity (2.5% vs. 4.6%, P=0.004), lower proportion of open conversion (1.2% vs. 4.5%, P<0.001), shorter post operative stay (4 days vs. 5 days, P<0.001), but higher rate of 30-day readmission (3.5% vs. 2.1%, P=0.042). These results were then validated by a 1:2 PSM analysis. In the subset analysis for 3,614 patients with cirrhosis, RMLR showed lower median blood loss, decreased blood transfusion, lower open conversion and shorter post operative stay than LMLR. CONCLUSION: RMLR demonstrated statistically significant advantages over LMLR even for resections in the AL segments although most of the observed clinical differences were minimal.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Various Settings: An International Multicenter Propensity Score Matched Study of 10.075 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the perioperative outcomes of robotic liver surgery (RLS) and laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) in various settings. BACKGROUND: Clear advantages of RLS over LLS have rarely been demonstrated, and the associated costs of robotic surgery are generally higher than those of laparoscopic surgery. Therefore, the exact role of the robotic approach in minimally invasive liver surgery remains to be defined. METHODS: In this international retrospective cohort study, the outcomes of patients who underwent RLS and LLS for all indications between 2009 and 2021 in 34 hepatobiliary referral centers were compared. Subgroup analyses were performed to compare both approaches across several types of procedures: (1) minor resections in the anterolateral (2, 3, 4b, 5, and 6) or (2) posterosuperior segments (1, 4a, 7, 8), and (3) major resections (≥3 contiguous segments). Propensity score matching was used to mitigate the influence of selection bias. The primary outcome was textbook outcome in liver surgery (TOLS), previously defined as the absence of intraoperative incidents ≥grade 2, postoperative bile leak ≥grade B, severe morbidity, readmission, and 90-day or in-hospital mortality with the presence of an R0 resection margin in case of malignancy. The absence of a prolonged length of stay was added to define TOLS+. RESULTS: Among the 10.075 included patients, 1.507 underwent RLS and 8.568 LLS. After propensity score matching, both groups constituted 1.505 patients. RLS was associated with higher rates of TOLS (78.3% vs 71.8%, P < 0.001) and TOLS+ (55% vs 50.4%, P = 0.026), less Pringle usage (39.1% vs 47.1%, P < 0.001), blood loss (100 vs 200 milliliters, P < 0.001), transfusions (4.9% vs 7.9%, P = 0.003), conversions (2.7% vs 8.8%, P < 0.001), overall morbidity (19.3% vs 25.7%, P < 0.001), and microscopically irradical resection margins (10.1% vs. 13.8%, P = 0.015), and shorter operative times (190 vs 210 minutes, P = 0.015). In the subgroups, RLS tended to have higher TOLS rates, compared with LLS, for minor resections in the posterosuperior segments (n = 431 per group, 75.9% vs 71.2%, P = 0.184) and major resections (n = 321 per group, 72.9% vs 67.5%, P = 0.086), although these differences did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: While both produce excellent outcomes, RLS might facilitate slightly higher TOLS rates than LLS.

Robotic Left Hepatectomy with En Bloc Biliary Resection and Roux-en-Y Hepaticojejunostomy: A Technique of Portal Venous Tangential Vascular Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Robotic technology is increasingly utilized in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma treatments, requiring expertise in minimally invasive liver surgeries and biliary reconstructions. These resections often involve vascular and multiple sectoral bile duct reconstructions. Minimally invasive vascular repairs are now emerging with promising outcomes, potentially altering criteria for selecting minimally invasive hepatobiliary tumor resections. In this multimedia article, we describe our technique of robotic portal venous tangential primary reconstruction with right sectoral bile duct unification ductoplasty for the treatment of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma using the robotic approach. METHODS: The robotic technique was chosen in this operation with preoperative anticipation of needing vascular resection and reconstruction due to left portal vein tumor involvement. Additionally, a Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy to the right anterior and posterior sectoral duct was planned for biliary reconstruction. Proximal and distal vascular control of the portal vein bifurcation was obtained by placing vascular bulldog clamps across the main and right portal veins. Once an R0 vascular margin was obtained on the left portal vein, portal bifurcation was tangentially repaired. Perfusion to the liver was then restored, and left hemihepatectomy with en bloc extrahepatic biliary resection was carried out, followed by Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy reconstruction to the right anterior and posterior sectoral bile ducts, as a single anastomosis. RESULTS: The operation was uneventful without vascular or biliary complications. Robotic unification ductoplasty circumvented the need for multiple anastomoses. CONCLUSION: The robotic approach for left-sided perihilar cholangiocarcinoma resections, requiring precise biliovascular management, is safe, feasible, and efficient. This method demonstrates the potential of robotic techniques as an alternative to traditional open surgery.

Robotic Biliary Stricturoplasty and Roux-en-Y Hepaticojejunostomy After Hepatic Artery Infusion Pump Injury.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic artery infusion pump (HAIP) with floxuridine/dexamethasone and systemic chemotherapy is an established treatment regimen, which had been reported about converting 47% of patients with stage 4 colorectal liver metastasis from unresectable to resectable.1,2 To this effect, HAIP chemotherapy contributes to prolonged survival of many patients, which otherwise may not have other treatment options. Biliary sclerosis, however, is a known complication of the HAIP treatment, which occurs in approximately 5.5% of patients receiving this modality as an adjuvant therapy after hepatectomy and in 2% of patients receiving HAIP treatment for unresectable disease.3 While biliary sclerosis diffusely affects the perihilar and intrahepatic biliary tree, a dominant stricture maybe found in select cases, which gives an opportunity for a local surgical treatment after failure of endoscopic stenting/dilations. While the use of minimally invasive approach to biliary surgery is gradually increasing,4 there have been no descriptions of its application in this scenario. In this video, we demonstrate the use of minimally invasive robotic technique for biliary stricturoplasty and Roux-en-Y (RY) hepaticojejunostomy to treat persistent right hepatic duct stricture after HAIP chemotherapy. PATIENT: A 68-year-old woman with history of multifocal bilobar stage 4 colorectal liver metastasis presented to our office with obstructive jaundice and recurrent cholangitis that required nine endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies (ERCPs) and a placement of internal-external percutaneous transhepatic biliary drain (PTBD) by interventional radiology within the past 2 years. Her past surgical history was consistent with laparoscopic right hemicolectomy 3 years prior, followed by a left lateral sectorectomy with placement of an HAIP for adjuvant treatment. The patient had more than ten metastatic liver lesions within the right and left lobe, ranging from 2 to 3 cm in size at the time of HAIP placement. The patient had a histologically normal background liver parenchyma before the HAIP chemotherapy treatment. The patient did not have any history of alcohol use, diabetes mellitus, metabolic syndrome, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, or other underlying intrinsic liver disorders, which are known to contribute to the development of hepatic fibrosis. Despite a radiologically disease-free status, the patient started to have episodes of acute cholangitis 1 year after the placement of HAIP that required multiple admissions to a local hospital. The HAIP was subsequently removed once the diagnosis of biliary sclerosis was made despite dose reductions and treatment with intrahepatic dexamethasone for almost 1 year. In addition to this finding, the known liver metastases have shown complete radiological resolution. Therefore further treatment with HAIP was deemed unnecessary, and pump removal was undertaken. Magnetic resonance imaging showed a dominant stricture at the junction of the right anterior and right posterior sectoral hepatic duct. The location of the dominant stricture was confirmed by an ERCP and cholangioscopy. Absence of neoplasia was confirmed with multiple cholangioscopic biopsies. Multiple endoscopic and percutaneous attempts with stent placement failed to dilate the area of stricture. Postprocedural cholangiographies showed a persistent significant narrowing, which led to multiple recurrent obstructive jaundice and severe cholangitis. While the use of surgical approach is rarely needed in the treatment of biliary sclerosis, a decision was made after extensive multidisciplinary discussions to perform a robotic stricturoplasty and RY hepaticojejunostomy with preservation of the native common bile duct. TECHNIQUE: The operation began with a laparoscopic adhesiolysis to allow for identification of HAIP tubing (which was later removed) and placement of robotic ports. A peripheral liver biopsy was obtained to evaluate the degree of hepatic parenchymal fibrosis. Porta hepatic area was carefully exposed without causing an inadvertent injury to the surrounding hollow organs. Biopsy of perihepatic soft tissues was taken as appropriate to rule out any extrahepatic disease. The common bile duct and common hepatic duct with ERCP stents within it were identified with the use of ultrasonography. Anterior wall of the common hepatic duct was then opened, exposing the two plastic stents. Cephalad extension of the choledochotomy was made toward the biliary bifurcation and the right hepatic duct. The distal common bile duct was preserved for future endoscopic access to the biliary tree. After lowering the right-sided hilar plate, dense fibrosis around the right hepatic duct was divided sharply with robotic scissors, achieving a mechanical release of the dominant stricture. An intraoperative cholangioscopy was performed to confirm adequate openings of the right hepatic duct secondary and tertiary radicles, as well as patency of the left hepatic duct. A 4-Fr Fogarty catheter was used to sweep the potential biliary debris from within the right and left hepatic lobe. Finally, a confirmatory choledochoscopy was performed to ensure patency and clearance of the right-sided intrahepatic biliary ducts and the left hepatic duct before fashioning the hepaticojejunostomy. A 40-cm antecolic roux limb was next prepared for the RY hepaticojejunostomy. A side-to-side double staple technique was utilized to create the jejunojejunostomy. The common enterotomy was closed in a running watertight fashion. Once the roux limb was transposed to the porta hepatic in a tension-free manner, a side-to-side hepaticojejunostomy was constructed in a running fashion by using absorbable barbed sutures. The index suture was placed at 9 o'clock location, and the posterior wall of the anastomosis was run toward 3 o'clock location. This stabilized the roux limb to the bile duct. The anterior wall of the anastomosis was next fashioned by using a running technique from both corners of the anastomosis toward the middle (12 o'clock), where both sutures were tied together. This completed a wide side-to-side hepaticojejunostomy anastomosis encompassing the upper common hepatic duct, biliary bifurcation, and the right hepatic duct. A closed suction drain was placed before closing.5 RESULTS: The operative time was approximately 4 hr with 60 ml of blood loss. The postoperative course was uneventful. The patient was discharged home on postoperative Day 5 after removal of the closed suction drain, confirming the absence of bile leak. The patient had developed periportal/periductal fibrosis, cholestasis, and moderate-severe parenchymal fibrosis (F3-F4) based on liver biopsy, often seen in patients treated with a long course of floxuridine HAIP chemotherapy. The patient is clinically doing well at 1 year outpatient follow-up without any evidence of recurrent cholangitis at the time of this manuscript preparation. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic biliary stricturoplasty with RY hepaticojejunostomy for treatment of biliary sclerosis after HAIP chemotherapy is safe and feasible. Appropriate experience in minimally invasive hepatobiliary surgery is necessary to achieve this goal.

Clinical Outcomes of Robotic Resection for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A First, Multicenter, Trans-Atlantic, Expert-Center, Collaborative Study.

INTRODUCTION: Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma is a difficult cancer to treat with frequent vascular invasion, local recurrence, and poor survival. Due to the need for biliary anastomosis and potential vascular resection, the standard approach is an open operation. Suboptimal outcomes after laparoscopic resection had been sporadically reported by high-volume centers. In this first, Trans-Atlantic, multicenter study, we report our outcomes of robotic resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. This is the largest study of its kind in the Western hemisphere. METHODS: Between 2016 and 2023, we prospectively followed patients undergoing robotic resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma at three, high-volume, robotic, liver-surgery centers. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients underwent perihilar cholangiocarcinoma utilizing the robotic technique; Klatskin type-3 was the most common. The median age was 72 years, and 82% of the patients underwent preoperative biliary drainage. Median operative time was 481 minutes with a median estimated blood loss of 200 mL. The number of harvested lymph nodes was seven, and 11 (28%) patients yielded positive lymph nodes. Three patients required vascular reconstruction; 18% of patients had >1 biliary anastomosis. R0 resection margins were achieved in 82% of patients. Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥3 complications were seen in 16% of patients. The length of stay was 6 days. Five patients had an unplanned readmission within 30 days. One patient died within 30 days. With a median follow-up of 15 months, 68% of patients are alive without disease, 13% recurred, and 19% died. CONCLUSIONS: Application of the robotic platform for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma is safe and feasible with acceptable short-term clinical and oncological outcomes.

Impact of Liver Cirrhosis, Severity of Cirrhosis, and Portal Hypertension on the Difficulty and Outcomes of Laparoscopic and Robotic Major Liver Resections for Primary Liver Malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) offer potential benefits such as reduced blood loss and morbidity compared with open liver resections. Several studies have suggested that the impact of cirrhosis differs according to the extent and complexity of resection. Our aim was to investigate the impact of cirrhosis on the difficulty and outcomes of MILR, focusing on major hepatectomies. METHODS: A total of 2534 patients undergoing minimally invasive major hepatectomies (MIMH) for primary malignancies across 58 centers worldwide were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score (PSM) and coarsened exact matching (CEM) were used to compare patients with and without cirrhosis. RESULTS: A total of 1353 patients (53%) had no cirrhosis, 1065 (42%) had Child-Pugh A and 116 (4%) had Child-Pugh B cirrhosis. Matched comparison between non-cirrhotics vs Child-Pugh A cirrhosis demonstrated comparable blood loss. However, after PSM, postoperative morbidity and length of hospitalization was significantly greater in Child-Pugh A cirrhosis, but these were not statistically significant with CEM. Comparison between Child-Pugh A and Child-Pugh B cirrhosis demonstrated the latter had significantly higher transfusion rates and longer hospitalization after PSM, but not after CEM. Comparison of patients with cirrhosis of all grades with and without portal hypertension demonstrated no significant difference in all major perioperative outcomes after PSM and CEM. CONCLUSIONS: The presence and severity of cirrhosis affected the difficulty and impacted the outcomes of MIMH, resulting in higher blood transfusion rates, increased postoperative morbidity, and longer hospitalization in patients with more advanced cirrhosis. As such, future difficulty scoring systems for MIMH should incorporate liver cirrhosis and its severity as variables.

Factors Associated with and Impact of Open Conversion in Laparoscopic and Robotic Minor Liver Resections: An International Multicenter Study of 10,541 Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the increasing widespread adoption and experience in minimally invasive liver resections (MILR), open conversion occurs not uncommonly even with minor resections and as been reported to be associated with inferior outcomes. We aimed to identify risk factors for and outcomes of open conversion in patients undergoing minor hepatectomies. We also studied the impact of approach (laparoscopic or robotic) on outcomes. METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of 20,019 patients who underwent RLR and LLR across 50 international centers between 2004-2020. Risk factors for and perioperative outcomes of open conversion were analysed. Multivariate and propensity score-matched analysis were performed to control for confounding factors. RESULTS: Finally, 10,541 patients undergoing either laparoscopic (LLR; 89.1%) or robotic (RLR; 10.9%) minor liver resections (wedge resections, segmentectomies) were included. Multivariate analysis identified LLR, earlier period of MILR, malignant pathology, cirrhosis, portal hypertension, previous abdominal surgery, larger tumor size, and posterosuperior location as significant independent predictors of open conversion. The most common reason for conversion was technical issues (44.7%), followed by bleeding (27.2%), and oncological reasons (22.3%). After propensity score matching (PSM) of baseline characteristics, patients requiring open conversion had poorer outcomes compared with successful MILR cases as evidenced by longer operative times, more blood loss, higher requirement for perioperative transfusion, longer duration of hospitalization and higher morbidity, reoperation, and 90-day mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple risk factors were associated with conversion of MILR even for minor hepatectomies, and open conversion was associated with significantly poorer perioperative outcomes.

Initial clinical outcomes of robotic resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: Is it safe and effective?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We aimed to describe our outcomes of robotic resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, the largest single institutional series in the Western hemisphere to date. METHODS: Between 2016 and 2022, we prospectively followed all patients who underwent robotic resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. RESULTS: In total, 23 patients underwent robotic resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, 18 receiving concomitant hepatectomy. The median age was 73 years. Operative time was 470 min with an estimated blood loss of 150 mL. No intraoperative conversions to open or other intraoperative complications occurred. Median length of stay was 5 days. Four postoperative complications occurred. Three readmissions occurred within 30 days with one 90-day mortality. R0 resection was achieved in 87% of patients and R1 in 13% of patients. At a median follow-up of 27 months, 15 patients were alive without evidence of disease, two patients with local recurrence at 1 year, and six were deceased. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of the robotic platform for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma is safe and feasible with excellent perioperative outcomes. Further studies are needed to determine the long-term oncological outcomes.

Internal validation of the Tampa Robotic Difficulty Scoring System: real-time assessment of the novel robotic scoring system in predicting clinical outcomes after hepatectomy.

INTRODUCTION: As the robotic approach in hepatectomy gains prominence, the need to establish a robotic-specific difficulty scoring system (DSS) is evident. The Tampa Difficulty Score was conceived to bridge this gap, offering a novel and dedicated robotic DSS aimed at improving preoperative surgical planning and predicting potential clinical challenges in robotic hepatectomies. In this study, we internally validated the recently published Tampa DSS by applying the scoring system to our most recent cohort of patients. METHODS: The Tampa Difficulty Score was applied to 170 recent patients who underwent robotic hepatectomy in our center. Patients were classified into: Group 1 (score 1-8, n = 23), Group 2 (score 9-24, n = 120), Group 3 (score 25-32, n = 20), and Group 4 (score 33-49, n = 7). Key variables for each of the groups were analyzed and compared. Statistical significance was accepted at p ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: Notable correlations were found between the Tampa Difficulty Score and key clinical parameters such as operative duration (p < 0.0001), estimated blood loss (p < 0.0001), and percentage of major resection (p = 0.00007), affirming the score's predictive capacity for operative technical complexity. The Tampa Difficulty Score also correlated with major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) (p < 0.0001), length of stay (p = 0.011), and 30-day readmission (p = 0.046) after robotic hepatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: The Tampa Difficulty Score, through the internal validation process, has confirmed its effectiveness in predicting intra- and postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing robotic hepatectomy. The predictive capacity of this system is useful in preoperative surgical planning and risk categorization. External validation is necessary to further explore the accuracy of this robotic DSS.

Epidural versus general anesthesia for laparo-endoscopic single-site cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: This study compares outcomes after LESS cholecystectomy utilizing epidural versus general anesthesia. METHODS: Patients undergoing LESS Cholecystectomy were randomized into receiving epidural or general anesthesia by protocol. Patients used a Visual Analog Scale to rate pain from 0 (no pain) to 10 (severe pain). Data presented as median (mean ± standard deviation). RESULTS: 75 patients underwent LESS cholecystectomy with general anesthesia [32 patients (22% men) after five patients withdrew consent] or epidural anesthesia [23 patients (22% men) after 15 patients withdrew consent]. Respectively, they were of age 38 years (41 ± 15.1) and 47 years (48 ± 13.9), BMI 29 (28 ± 4.9) kg/m2 and 28 (28 ± 3.8) kg/m2, and ASA 2 (2 ± 0.5) and 2 (2 ± 0.3) (p > 0.05 for all). LOS for patients receiving general vs. epidural anesthesia was 72 min (122 ± 104.4) vs. 95 min (113 ± 77.5) (p = 0.25). On POD 0, patients receiving general anesthesia rated pain as 4 (4 ± 2.9) vs. 0 (1 ± 2.2) for epidural anesthesia (p = 0.02). On POD 1, they rated pain as 6 (5 ± 2.3) vs. 6 (6 ± 2.9) (p = 0.68). On POD 6, patients rated pain as 3 (3 ± 2.7) vs. 4 (3 ± 2.2) (p = 1.00). For patient satisfaction with incisional scars for those receiving general vs. epidural anesthesia, patients rated their scars to be 10 (8 ± 3.6) vs. 10 (9 ± 1.2) (p = 0.21). Total costs for the hospital using general vs. epidural anesthesia were found $6,909 (7,167 ± 2,083.8) vs. $6,225 (5,848 ± 1530.1) (p = 0.014), respectively. Patients self-assessed satisfaction on a scale of 1 (worst) to 5 (best) as a 5 (5 ± 0). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing LESS cholecystectomy with general vs. epidural anesthesia had similar demographics, LOS, and pain scores. Patients that received epidural anesthesia reported less pain and incurred less cost. Utilization of epidural anesthesia in lieu of general anesthesia for LESS cholecystectomy is safe, reduces pain, and offers potential cost savings.

A decade of experience with minimally invasive anti-reflux operations: robot vs. LESS.

BACKGROUND: The increasing use of robotic systems for anti-reflux operations prompted this study to evaluate and compare the efficacy of robotic and Laparo-Endoscopic Single-Site (LESS) approaches. METHODS: From 2012, 228 robotic fundoplication and 518 LESS fundoplication patients were prospectively followed, analyzing perioperative metrics. Data are presented as median (mean ± SD); significance at p ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: Patients undergoing a robotic vs. LESS fundoplication were 67 (64 ± 13.7) vs. 61 (59 ± 15.1) years-old with BMIs of 25 (25 ± 3.2) vs. 26 (25 ± 3.9) kg/m2 (p = 0.001 and 1.00, respectively). 72% of patients who underwent the robotic approach had a previous abdominal operation(s) vs 44% who underwent the LESS approach (p = 0.0001). 38% vs. 8% had a re-operative fundoplication (p = 0.0001), 59% vs. 45% had a type IV hiatal hernia (p = 0.0004). Operative duration was 160 (176 ± 76.7) vs. 130 (135 ± 50.5) min (p = 0.0001). There were 0 (robotic) vs. 5 (LESS) conversions to a different approach (p = 0.33). 5 Patients vs. 3 patients experienced postoperative complications (p = 0.06), and length of stay (LOS) was 1 (2 ± 2.6) vs. 1 (1 ± 3.2) days (p = 0.0001). Patient symptomatic dysphagia preoperatively for the robotic vs. LESS approach was scored as 2 (2.4 ± 1.9) vs. 1 (1.9 ± 1.6). Postoperatively, symptomatic dysphagia was scored as 1 (1.5 ± 1.6) vs. 1 (1.7 ± 1.7). The change in these scores was - 1 (- 1 ± 2.2) vs. 0 (- 0.5 ± 2.2) (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Despite longer operative times and LOS in older patients, the robotic approach is efficient in undertaking very difficult operations, including patients with type IV or recurrent hiatal hernias. Furthermore, preoperative anti-reflux operations were more likely to be undertaken with the robotic approach than the LESS approach. The patient's postoperative symptomatic dysphagia improved relatively more than after the LESS approach. The vast majority of patients who underwent the LESS approach enjoyed improved cosmesis, thus, making LESS a stronger candidate for more routine operations. Despite patient selection bias, the robotic and LESS approaches to anti-reflux operations are safe, efficacious, and should be situationally utilized.

Unplanned conversions of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: short-term outcomes and suggested stepwise approach for a safe conversion.

OBJECTIVE: With the increased adoption of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy, the effects of unplanned conversions to an 'open' operation are ill-defined. This study aims to describe the impact of unplanned conversions of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy on short-term outcomes and suggest a stepwise approach for safe unplanned conversions during robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. METHODS: This is an analysis of 400 consecutive patients undergoing robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy in a single high-volume institution. Data are presented as median (mean ± SD), and significance is accepted with 95% probability. RESULTS: Between November 2012 and February 2023, 184 (46%) women and 216 (54%) men, aged 70 (68 ± 11.0) years, underwent a robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Unplanned conversions occurred in 42 (10.5%) patients; 18 (5%) were converted due to unanticipated vascular involvement, 13 (3%) due to failure to obtain definitive control of bleeding, and 11 (3%) due to visceral obesity. Men were more likely to require a conversion than women (29 vs. 13, p = 0.05). Conversions were associated with shorter operative time (376 (323 ± 182.2) vs. 434 (441 ± 98.7) min, p < 0.0001) but higher estimated blood loss (675 (1010 ± 1168.1) vs. 150 (196 ± 176.8) mL, p < 0.0001). Patients that required an unplanned conversion had higher rates of complications with Clavien-Dindo scores of III-V (31% vs. 12%, p = 0.003), longer length of stay (8 (11 ± 11.6) vs. 5 (7 ± 6.2), p = 0.0005), longer ICU length of stay (1 (2 ± 5.1) vs. 0 (0 ± 1.3), p < 0.0001) and higher mortality rates (21% vs. 4%, p = 0.0001). The conversion rate significantly decreased over time (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Unplanned conversions of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy significantly and negatively affect short-term outcomes, including postoperative mortality. Men were more likely to require a conversion than women. The unplanned conversions rates significantly decreased over time, implying that increased proficiency and patient selection may prevent unplanned conversions. An unplanned conversion should be undertaken in an organized stepwise approach to maximize patient safety.

TAVAC: comprehensive review of currently available hemostatic products as adjunct to surgical hemostasis.

BACKGROUND: The use of hemostatic agents by general surgeons during abdominal operations is commonplace as an adjunctive measure to minimize risks of postoperative bleeding and its downstream complications. Proper selection of products can be hampered by marginal understanding of their pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. While a variety of hemostatic agents are currently available on the market, the choice of those products is often confusing for surgeons. This paper aims to summarize and compare the available hemostatic products for each clinical indication and to ultimately better guide surgeons in the selection and proper use of hemostatic agents in daily clinical practice. METHODS: We utilized PubMed electronic database and published product information from the respective pharmaceutical companies to collect information on the characteristics of the hemostatic products. RESULTS: All commercially available hemostatic agents in the US are described with a description of their mechanism of action, indications, contraindications, circumstances in which they are best utilized, and expected results. CONCLUSION: Hemostatic products come with many different types and specifications. They are valuable tools to serve as an adjunct to surgical hemostasis. Proper education and knowledge of their characteristics are important for the selection of the right agent and optimal utilization.

The robotic-assisted laparoscopic approach to biliary tract resection and reconstruction for benign indications: A single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: Benign biliary disease (BBD) is a prevalent condition involving patients who require extrahepatic bile duct resections and reconstructions due to nonmalignant causes. METHODS: This study followed all patients who underwent biliary resections for BBD between 2015 and 2023. We excluded those with malignant conditions and patients who had an 'open' operation. Based on the patient's anatomy, the procedures employed were either robotic Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy (RYHJ) or robotic choledochoduodenostomy (CDD). RESULTS: From the 33 patients studied, 23 were female, and 10 were male. Anesthesiology (ASA) class was 3 ± 0.5; the MELD score was 9 ± 4.1; the Child-Pugh score was 6 ± 1.7. The primary indications for undergoing the operation included iatrogenic bile duct injuries, biliary strictures, and type 1 choledochal cysts. The average surgical duration was about 272 min, and the average blood loss amounted to 79 mL. Postoperatively, three patients experienced major complications, all attributed to anastomotic leaks. The average hospital stay was 4 days, with a readmission rate of 15% within 30 days. During an average follow-up period of 33 months, one patient had to undergo a revision at 18 months due to stricture. This necessitated further duct resection and reanastomosis. Notably, there were no reported hepatectomies, no conversion to the 'open' method, no intraoperative complications, and no mortalities. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic extrahepatic bile duct resection and reconstruction with Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy or choledochoduodenostomy is safe with an acceptable postoperative morbidity, short hospital length of stay, and low postoperative stricture rate at intermediate duration follow-up.

Outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy with or without preoperative hyperbaric oxygen therapy.

Background: Hyperbaric oxygen (HBO2) therapy is an alternative method against the deleterious effects of ischemic/reperfusion (I/R) injury and its inflammatory response. This study assessed the effect of preoperative HBO2 on patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. Study Design: Patients were randomized via a computer-generated algorithm. Patients in the HBO2 cohort received two sessions of HBO2 the evening before and the morning of surgery. Measurements of inflammatory mediators and self-assessed pain scales were determined pre-and postoperatively. In addition, perioperative variables and long-term survival were collected and analyzed. Data are presented as median (mean ± SD). Results: 33 patients were included; 17 received preoperative HBO2, and 16 did not. There were no intraoperative or postoperative statistical differences between patients with or without preoperative HBO2. Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), IL-6, and IL-10 increased slightly before returning to normal, while TGF-alpha decreased before increasing. However, there were no differences with or without HBO2. At postoperative day 30, the pain level measured with VAS score (Visual Analog Score) was lower after HBO2 (1 ± 1.3 vs. 3 ± 3.0, p=0.05). Eleven (76%) patients in the HBO2 cohort and 12 (75%) patients in the non- HBO2 had malignant pathology. The percentage of positive lymph nodes in the HBO2 was 7% compared to 14% in the non-HBO2 (p<0.001). Overall survival was inferior after HBO2 compared to the non- HBO2 (p=0.03). Conclusions: Preoperative HBO2 did not affect perioperative outcomes or significantly change the inflammatory mediators for patients undergoing robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Long-term survival was inferior after preoperative HBO2. Further randomized controlled studies are required to assess the full impact of this treatment on patients' prognosis.

Defining Global Benchmarks for Laparoscopic Liver Resections: An International Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: To establish global benchmark outcomes indicators after laparoscopic liver resections (L-LR). BACKGROUND: There is limited published data to date on the best achievable outcomes after L-LR. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter database of 11,983 patients undergoing L-LR in 45 international centers in 4 continents between 2015 and 2020. Three specific procedures: left lateral sectionectomy (LLS), left hepatectomy (LH), and right hepatectomy (RH) were selected to represent the 3 difficulty levels of L-LR. Fifteen outcome indicators were selected to establish benchmark cutoffs. RESULTS: There were 3519 L-LR (LLS, LH, RH) of which 1258 L-LR (40.6%) cases performed in 34 benchmark expert centers qualified as low-risk benchmark cases. These included 659 LLS (52.4%), 306 LH (24.3%), and 293 RH (23.3%). The benchmark outcomes established for operation time, open conversion rate, blood loss ≥500 mL, blood transfusion rate, postoperative morbidity, major morbidity, and 90-day mortality after LLS, LH, and RH were 209.5, 302, and 426 minutes; 2.1%, 13.4%, and 13.0%; 3.2%, 20%, and 47.1%; 0%, 7.1%, and 10.5%; 11.1%, 20%, and 50%; 0%, 7.1%, and 20%; and 0%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study established the first global benchmark outcomes for L-LR in a large-scale international patient cohort. It provides an up-to-date reference regarding the "best achievable" results for L-LR for which centers adopting L-LR can use as a comparison to enable an objective assessment of performance gaps and learning curves.

Propensity-score Matched and Coarsened-exact Matched Analysis Comparing Robotic and Laparoscopic Major Hepatectomies: An International Multicenter Study of 4822 Cases.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes between robotic major hepatectomy (R-MH) and laparoscopic major hepatectomy (L-MH). BACKGROUND: Robotic techniques may overcome the limitations of laparoscopic liver resection. However, it is unknown whether R-MH is superior to L-MH. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter database of patients undergoing R-MH or L-MH at 59 international centers from 2008 to 2021. Data on patient demographics, center experience volume, perioperative outcomes, and tumor characteristics were collected and analyzed. Both 1:1 propensity-score matched (PSM) and coarsened-exact matched (CEM) analyses were performed to minimize selection bias between both groups. RESULTS: A total of 4822 cases met the study criteria, of which 892 underwent R-MH and 3930 underwent L-MH. Both 1:1 PSM (841 R-MH vs. 841 L-MH) and CEM (237 R-MH vs. 356 L-MH) were performed. R-MH was associated with significantly less blood loss {PSM:200.0 [interquartile range (IQR):100.0, 450.0] vs 300.0 (IQR:150.0, 500.0) mL; P = 0.012; CEM:170.0 (IQR: 90.0, 400.0) vs 200.0 (IQR:100.0, 400.0) mL; P = 0.006}, lower rates of Pringle maneuver application (PSM: 47.1% vs 63.0%; P < 0.001; CEM: 54.0% vs 65.0%; P = 0.007) and open conversion (PSM: 5.1% vs 11.9%; P < 0.001; CEM: 5.5% vs 10.4%, P = 0.04) compared with L-MH. On subset analysis of 1273 patients with cirrhosis, R-MH was associated with a lower postoperative morbidity rate (PSM: 19.5% vs 29.9%; P = 0.02; CEM 10.4% vs 25.5%; P = 0.02) and shorter postoperative stay [PSM: 6.9 (IQR: 5.0, 9.0) days vs 8.0 (IQR: 6.0 11.3) days; P < 0.001; CEM 7.0 (IQR: 5.0, 9.0) days vs 7.0 (IQR: 6.0, 10.0) days; P = 0.047]. CONCLUSIONS: This international multicenter study demonstrated that R-MH was comparable to L-MH in safety and was associated with reduced blood loss, lower rates of Pringle maneuver application, and conversion to open surgery.