Robotic Versus Open Liver Resection in Hepatocarcinoma: Surgical and Oncological Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive approaches are spreading in every field of surgery, including liver surgery. However, studies comparing robotic hepatectomy with the conventional open approach regarding oncologic outcomes for hepatocellular carcinoma are limited. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed demographics characteristics, pathologic features, surgical, and oncological outcomes of patients who underwent robotic and conventional open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. RESULTS: No significant differences in demographics features, tumor size, tumor location, and type of liver resection were found. The morbidity rate was similar, 23% for the open group versus 17% of the robotic group (P=0.605). Perioperative data analysis showed a greater estimated blood loss in patients who underwent open resection, if compared with robotic group (P=0.003). R0 resection and disease-free resection margins showed no statistically significant differences. The 3-year disease-free survival of the robotic group was comparable with that of the open group (54% vs. 37%; P=0.592), as was the 3-year overall survival (87% vs. 78%; P=0.203). CONCLUSIONS: The surgical and the oncological outcomes seem to be comparable between minimally invasive and open hepatectomy. Robotic liver resections are effective, and do not compromise the oncological outcome, representing a reasonable alternative to the open approach.

Single-centre comparison of robotic and open pancreatoduodenectomy: a propensity score-matched study.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic head and periampullary cancers is still associated with high perioperative morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RAPD) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) performed in a high-volume centre. METHODS: A single-centre, prospective database was used to retrospectively compare the early outcomes of RAPD procedures to standard OPD procedures completed between January 2014 and December 2018. Of the 121 included patients, 78 underwent RAPD and 43 underwent OPD. After propensity score matching (PSM), 35 RAPD patients were matched with 35 OPD patients with similar preoperative characteristics. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in most of the baseline demographics and perioperative outcomes in the two groups after PSM optimization with the exception of the operative time (530 min (RAPD) versus 335 min (OPD) post-match, p < 0.000). No differences were found between the two groups in terms of complications (including pancreatic leaks, 11.4% in both OPD and RAPD), perioperative mortality, reoperations or readmissions. Earlier refeeding was obtained in the RAPD group vs. the OPD group (3 vs. 4 days, p = 0.002). Although the differences in the length of the hospital stay and blood transfusions were not statistically significant, both parameters showed a positive trend in favour of RAPD. The number of harvested lymph nodes was similar and oncologically adequate. CONCLUSIONS: RAPD is a safe and oncologically adequate technique to treat malignancies arising from the pancreatic head and periampullary region. Several perioperative parameters resulted in trends favouring RAPD over OPD, at the price of longer operating time. Data should be reinforced with a larger sample to guarantee statistical significance.

Correction to: Single-centre comparison of robotic and open pancreatoduodenectomy: a propensity score-matched study.

In the Abstract, in the Methods section the sentence "Of the 121 included patients, 78 underwent RAPD and 43 underwent OPD." Should read: Of the 121 included patients, 77 underwent OPD and 44 underwent RAPD."

Surgical and oncological outcomes after ultrasound-guided robotic liver resections for malignant tumor. Analysis of a prospective database.

AIM: Robotic surgery is thought to have a role in widening the application of minimally invasive liver surgery. Nonetheless, data concerning surgical results for liver malignancies are presently still lacking. We aimed to evaluate the surgical and oncological outcomes of ultrasound guided robotic liver resections for hepatic malignancies. METHODS: All consecutive patients who received robotic resection of primary and secondary liver malignancies from September 2008 to January 2017 were analyzed. The same surgical team performed all procedures following the principle of parenchymal-sparing surgery. RESULTS: From a total of 51 patients, 13 patients (25%) underwent major and 38 (75%) minor hepatectomy. No mortality occurred. Two procedures were converted to open surgery. Five patients experienced major complications, with a reintervention rate of 6%. Median hospital stay was 5 days. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic surgery is a safe and feasible procedure for liver resection even when dealing with malignancies. Our data show that robotic surgery can be considered a valid option to treat patients with liver malignancies in a minimally invasive manner, without compromise the oncological results.

Pringle maneuver in robotic liver surgery: preliminary study.

BACKGROUND: Liver resection may be complicated by unpredictable intraoperative bleeding. Pringle's maneuver was the first attempt to control bleeding, but the main problem is the duration of ischemia. Robotic surgery thanks to the magnified view, three-dimensional visualization associated and fine movement allow to perform good parenchymal dissection and identification of vascular structure. Aim of study is to evaluate blood loss and the need to perform Pringle maneuver in patients underwent robotic liver resection. METHODS: Thirty-three patients underwent robotic liver resections were analyzed, 16 (48%) male and 17 (52%) female, with median age of 64 years. Seven (21%) patients had benign lesions and twenty-six (79%) malignant tumor. RESULTS: Seventeen (52%) patients had anatomical resections, while sixteen (48%) patients had non anatomical resection. Operative time was 270 minutes. Estimated blood loss was 100 mL and Pringle maneuver was carried out on seven patients. Median hospital stay was 4 days. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that liver resections with robotic technique can be performed safely even without systematic Pringle maneuver.