Robotic donor nephrectomy: optimizing outcomes beyond the limitations of laparoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Robotic donor nephrectomy (RDN) has emerged as a safe alternate to laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN), offering improved visualization, instrument dexterity and ergonomics. There is still concern about how to safely transition from LDN to RDN. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 150 consecutive living donor operations (75 LDN and 75 RDN) at our center, comparing the first 75 RDN's with the last 75 LDN's performed prior to the initiation of the robotic transplant program. Operative times and complications were used as surrogates of efficiency and safety, respectively, to estimate the learning curve with RDN. RESULTS: RDN was associated with a longer total operative time (RDN 182 vs LDN 144 min; P < 0.0001) but a significantly shorter post-operative length of stay (RDN 1.8 vs LDN 2.1 days; P = 0.0213). Donor complications and recipient outcomes were the same between both groups. Learning curve of RDN was estimated to be about 30 cases. CONCLUSIONS: RDN is a safe alternate to LDN with acceptable donor morbidity and no negative impact on recipient outcomes even during the early part of the RDN learning curve. Surgeon preferences for the robotic approach compared to traditional laparoscopy will require further scrutiny to improve ergonomics and operative efficiency.

Thunderbeat™ Integrated Bipolar and Ultrasonic Forceps in the Whipple Procedure: A Prospective Randomized Trial.

Thunderbeat™ is a device that uses both ultrasonic and advanced bipolar energies to achieve hemostasis. It has been evaluated in a variety of clinical contexts, but no literature exists regarding its application to pancreatic surgery. Using a prospective, randomized controlled trial, we evaluated its safety and efficacy in the Whipple procedure. Thirty-two participants were enrolled in the study. The Thunderbeat™ device during the Whipple procedure showed similar safety profile compared to standard of care.

Defining Benchmarks in Liver Transplantation: A Multicenter Outcome Analysis Determining Best Achievable Results.

: This multicentric study of 17 high-volume centers presents 12 benchmark values for liver transplantation. Those values, mostly targeting markers of morbidity, were gathered from 2024 "low risk" cases, and may serve as reference to assess outcome of single or any groups of patients. OBJECTIVE: To propose benchmark outcome values in liver transplantation, serving as reference for assessing individual patients or any other patient groups. BACKGROUND: Best achievable results in liver transplantation, that is, benchmarks, are unknown. Consequently, outcome comparisons within or across centers over time remain speculative. METHODS: Out of 7492 liver transplantation performed in 17 international centers from 3 continents, we identified 2024 low risk adult cases with a laboratory model for end-stage liver disease score ≤20 points, a balance of risk score ≤9, and receiving a primary graft by donation after brain death. We chose clinically relevant endpoints covering intra- and postoperative course, with a focus on complications graded by severity including the complication comprehensive index (CCI). Respective benchmarks were derived from the median value in each center, and the 75 percentile was considered the benchmark cutoff. RESULTS: Benchmark cases represented 8% to 49% of cases per center. One-year patient-survival was 91.6% with 3.5% retransplantations. Eighty-two percent of patients developed at least 1 complication during 1-year follow-up. Biliary complications occurred in one-fifth of the patients up to 6 months after surgery. Benchmark cutoffs were ≤4 days for ICU stay, ≤18 days for hospital stay, ≤59% for patients with severe complications (≥ Grade III) and ≤42.1 for 1-year CCI. Comparisons with the next higher risk group (model for end stage liver disease 21-30) disclosed an increase in morbidity but within benchmark cutoffs for most, but not all indicators, while in patients receiving a second graft from 1 center (n = 50) outcome values were all outside of benchmark values. CONCLUSIONS: Despite excellent 1-year survival, morbidity in benchmark cases remains high with half of patients developing severe complications during 1-year follow-up. Benchmark cutoffs targeting morbidity parameters offer a valid tool to assess higher risk groups.

Long-Term Endocrine and Exocrine Insufficiency After Pancreatectomy.

PURPOSE: To identify peri-operative risk factors and time to onset of pancreatic endocrine/exocrine insufficiency. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a single institutional series of patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or distal pancreatectomy (DP) between 2000 and 2015. Endocrine/exocrine insufficiencies were defined as need for new pharmacologic intervention. Cox proportional modeling was used to identify peri-operative variables to determine their impact on post-operative pancreatic insufficiency. RESULTS: A total of 1717 patient records were analyzed (75.47% PD, 24.53% DP) at median follow-up 17.88 months. Average age was 62.62 years, 51.78% were male, and surgery was for malignancy in 74.35% of patients. Post-operative endocrine insufficiency was present in 20.15% (n = 346). Male gender (p = 0.015), increased body mass index (BMI) (p < 0.001), tobacco use (p = 0.011), family history of diabetes (DM) (p < 0.001), personal history of DM (p ≤ 0.001), and DP (p ≤ 0.001) were correlated with increased risk. Mean time to onset was 20.80 ± 33.60 (IQR: 0.49-28.37) months. Post-operative exocrine insufficiency was present in 36.23% (n = 622). Race (p = 0.014), lower BMI (p < 0.001), family history of DM (p = 0.007), steatorrhea (p < 0.001), elevated pre-operative bilirubin (p = 0.019), and PD (p ≤ 0.001) were correlated with increased risk. Mean time to onset was 14.20 ± 26.90 (IQR: 0.89-12.69) months. CONCLUSIONS: In this large series of pancreatectomy patients, 20.15% and 36.23% of patients developed post-operative endocrine and exocrine insufficiency at a mean time to onset of 20.80 and 14.20 months, respectively. Patients should be educated regarding post-resection insufficiencies and providers should have heightened awareness long-term.

Flange Gastroenterostomy Results in Reduction in Delayed Gastric Emptying after Standard Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is a common serious problem after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Flange gastrojejunostomy (FL-GE) is a previously described technique that creates an internal flange in a hand-sewn gastroenterostomy. Results of FL-GE on incidence and severity of DGE after PD are presented. STUDY DESIGN: Data were extracted from a prospective database of PD. Standard PD with antrectomy were performed with flange gastroenterostomy (FL-GE) or other techniques (NonFL-GE) at a single institution. The International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition of DGE was used, and DGE severity was graded based on the ISGPS grading system and the Modified Accordion Grading System (MAGS). RESULTS: There were 215 standard PDs performed. Sixty-eight (32%) were FL-GE and 147 (68%) were NonFL-GE. Delayed gastric emptying rates in FL-GE and NonFL-GE were 9% and 23%, respectively (p = 0.012). Differences in severity of DGE were even more prominent: 29% of DGEs in the NonFL-GE group were ISGPS grade C vs 0% in FL-GE. Also, 35% of DGEs in the NonFL-GE group were MAGS 3 vs 0% in FL-GE. Because of some differences in sex and inflammatory complications between groups, a propensity score analysis was performed, creating 57 matched patients in the FL-GE and NonFL-GE groups. The incidence of DGE remained significantly different in the groups (5% in FL-GE vs 18% in NonFL-GE; p = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort study, the flange technique was associated with a marked reduction in the incidence of DGE after PD.