Surgical and oncological outcomes of our first 59 cases of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy.

PURPOSE: Robotics has shown encouraging results for a number of technically demanding abdominal surgeries including pancreaticoduodenectomy, which has originally represented a relative contraindication to the application of the minimally-invasive technique. We aimed to investigate the perioperative, clinicopathologic, and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy by assessing a consecutive series of totally robotic procedures. METHODS: All consecutive patients who underwent robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy were included in the present analysis. Perioperative, clinicopathologic and oncological outcomes were examined. In order to investigate the role of the learning curve, surgical outcomes were also used to compare the early and the late phase of our experience. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients underwent surgery. Median hospital stay was 9 days (5 - 110), with an overall morbidity and mortality of 37% and 3%, respectively. Of note, the rate of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula was 11.8%. R0 resections were achieved in 96% of patients and the 3-year disease-free and overall survivals were 37.2 and 61.9%, respectively. Overall, surgical outcomes did not vary significantly between the first and the late phase of the series. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy can be performed competently. It satisfies all features of oncological adequacy and may offer a number of advantages over standard procedures in terms of surgical results.

Robot-assisted gastrectomy for cancer.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic gastrectomy for cancer is commonly considered a challenging procedure. The technical drawbacks of laparoscopy have been addressed by robotic technology, which can facilitate demanding reconstructions and fine dissection. These features confer potential advantages in the execution of lymphadenectomy. OBJECTIVES: Here, we illustrate our technique of robotic gastrectomy and discuss advantages and drawbacks by reviewing the current literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We describe our technique for robot-assisted distal and total gastrectomy for cancer and assess the current literature dealing with short-term outcomes, immediate oncologic measures, and long-term oncologic outcomes of robot-assisted gastrectomy, in comparison with conventional laparoscopic and open surgery. RESULTS: The robotic procedure seems to be as safe and effective as conventional gastrectomy for gastric cancer, with a longer operative time and decreased blood loss in comparison with laparoscopic gastrectomy. CONCLUSION: The technical advantages offered by robotics could help to standardize minimally invasive D2 lymphadenectomy and enable surgeons to perform this procedure routinely. Despite the scarcity of long-term data on survival, immediate oncological measures (lymph node yield and margin status) are encouraging. Further studies investigating the long-term oncological outcomes are required.

[Robot-assisted gastrectomy for cancer. German version]. / Roboterassistierte Magenresektion beim Karzinom.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic gastrectomy for cancer is commonly considered a challenging procedure. The technical drawbacks of laparoscopy have been addressed by robotic technology, which can facilitate demanding reconstructions and fine dissection. These features confer potential advantages in the execution of lymphadenectomy. OBJECTIVES: Here, we illustrate our technique of robotic gastrectomy and discuss advantages and drawbacks by reviewing the current literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We describe our technique for robot-assisted distal and total gastrectomy for cancer and assess the current literature dealing with short-term outcomes, immediate oncologic measures, and long-term oncologic outcomes of robot-assisted gastrectomy, in comparison with conventional laparoscopic and open surgery. RESULTS: The robotic procedure seems to be as safe and effective as conventional gastrectomy for gastric cancer, with a longer operative time and decreased blood loss in comparison with laparoscopic gastrectomy. CONCLUSION: The technical advantages offered by robotics could help to standardize minimally invasive D2 lymphadenectomy and enable surgeons to perform this procedure routinely. Despite the scarcity of long-termdata on survival, immediate oncological measures (lymph node yield and margin status) are encouraging. Further studies investigating the long-term oncological outcomes are required.

Challenges in robotic distal pancreatectomy: systematic review of current practice.

Over the last decade, robotics has gained popularity and is increasingly employed to accomplish several abdominal surgical procedures. Nevertheless, pancreatectomies are regarded as demanding procedures for which the application of minimally-invasive surgery is still limited and its effectiveness has not been conclusively established. We aimed to investigate the current role of robot-assisted surgery to perform distal pancreatectomy. A systematic review of the English-language literature was conducted for articles dealing with robotic-assisted distal pancreatectomies. All relevant papers were evaluated on surgical and oncological outcomes. A total of 10 articles reporting on robotic distal pancreatectomies were finally considered in the analysis, including 259 patients. Mean operative time was 271 minutes (range 181-398); mean blood loss was 210 mL (range 104-361), in 11.6% of cases conversion to laparotomy occurred, spleen preservation was accomplished in 51.4% of procedures, mean time of postoperative hospital stay was 7 days. Overall, postoperative mortality and morbidity were 0% and 23.4% respectively, the mean number of lymph nodes harvested was 12.7. In all included series, no case of R1 resection was reported. Despite its relatively recent introduction in clinical practice, robotic-assisted surgery has been widely employed to perform distal pancreatectomy worldwide and it should be considered a safe and effective procedure. Both surgical and pathologic data support its application in the management of pancreatic lesions of the body and tail.

Robot-assisted surgery for gastric carcinoma: Five years follow-up and beyond: A single western center experience and long-term oncological outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Robot-assisted surgery for the treatment of gastric cancer is considered to be safe and feasible with early post-operative outcomes comparable to open and laparoscopic series. However, data regarding long-term oncological outcomes are lacking. Aim of this study is to evaluate long-term oncological outcomes of a cohort of gastric cancer patients treated surgically with the robot-assisted approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospectively collected database of robot-assisted gastrectomies performed for gastric cancer at the 'Misericordia Hospital' between September 2001 and October 2011 was retrospectively analysed. Data regarding surgical procedures, early postoperative course, and long-term follow-up were analysed. RESULTS: The study included 98 consecutive robot-assisted gastrectomies. Fifty-nine distal gastrectomies, 38 total gastrectomies, and 1 proximal gastrectomy. Open conversion occurred in seven patients (7.1%) due to locally advanced disease. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were 12.2% and 4.1% respectively. Post-operative staging showed 46 patients (46.9%) with stage I disease, 25 patients (25.5%) with stage II, 26 (26.5%) with stage III and 1 (1.02%) with stage IV. The mean follow-up was 46.9 months. Cumulative 5-year overall survival (OS) was 73.3% (95% CI: 62.2-84.4). Five-year survival by stage subgroups was 100% for patients with stage IA, 84.6% for stage IB, 76.9% for stage II, and 21.5% for stage III. The only patient in stage IV of this series died eight months after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted gastrectomy for the treatment of gastric cancer is safe and feasible. It provides long-term outcomes comparable to most open and laparoscopic series. Further studies are necessary to better define its indication.