Initial 50 consecutive full-robotic pancreatoduodenectomies without conversion by a single surgeon: a learning curve analysis from a tertiary referral high-volume center.

BACKGROUND: Several studies report on a learning curve for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (R-PD) ranging between 20 and 80 operations, with conversion rates varying between 1.1 and 35%. However, as these publications mostly refer to initial robotic experiences and do not take into account the previous surgical background in pancreatic surgery (PS) and in robotic-assisted surgery (RAS), the center's volume, as well as the platform used, we aimed to perform a surgical outcomes analysis with a particular view to these aspects. METHODS: Intraoperative and perioperative outcomes of the first 50 consecutive R-PD performed with the da Vinci Xi by the same surgeon, within a tertiary referral high-volume center, between January 2018 and March 2022, were analyzed. The surgeon was previously experienced in both PS and RAS. Shewhart control chart and cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis were used to evaluate the learning curve of R-PD. RESULTS: All the operations were performed with a full-robotic technique, without any conversion to open surgery. Twenty of 50 patients (40%) had a BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2, while 24/50 (48%) had undergone previous abdominal surgery. Mean console time was 276.30 ± 31.16 min. The median post-operative length of hospital stay was 10 days, while 20/50 (40%) patients were discharged within post-operative day 8. Six patients (12%) had major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or above). There was no 30-day mortality. Shewhart control chart and CUSUM analysis did not show a significant learning curve during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: An extensive prior experience in both PS and RAS, within a tertiary referral high-volume center with availability of the da Vinci Xi platform, can significantly flatten the learning curve and, therefore, enable safe performance of challenging operations, i.e., pancreatoduodenectomies with a minimally invasive approach, with very low risk of conversion to open surgery, even in the first 50 operations.

Robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy with the da Vinci Xi: can the costs of advanced technology be offset by clinical advantages? A case-matched cost analysis versus open approach.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) has shown some advantages over open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) but few studies have reported a cost analysis between the two techniques. We conducted a structured cost-analysis comparing pancreatoduodenectomy performed with the use of the da Vinci Xi, and the traditional open approach, and considering healthcare direct costs associated with the intervention and the short-term post-operative course. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty RPD and 194 OPD performed between January 2011 and December 2020 by the same operator at our high-volume multidisciplinary center for robot-assisted surgery and for pancreatic surgery, were retrospectively analyzed. Two comparable groups of 20 patients (Xi-RPD-group) and 40 patients (OPD-group) were obtained matching 1:2 the RPD-group with the OPD-group. Perioperative data and overall costs, including overall variable costs (OVCs) and fixed costs, were compared. RESULTS: No difference was reported in mean operative time: 428 min for Xi-RPD-group versus 404 min for OPD, p = 0.212. The median overall length of hospital stay was significantly lower in the Xi-RPD-group: 10 days versus 16 days, p = 0.001. In the Xi-RPD-group, consumable costs were significantly higher (€6149.2 versus €1267.4, p < 0.001), while hospital stay costs were significantly lower: €5231.6 versus €8180 (p = 0.001). No significant differences were found in terms of OVCs: €13,483.4 in Xi-RPD-group versus €11,879.8 in OPD-group (p = 0.076). CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted surgery is more expensive because of higher acquisition and maintenance costs. However, although RPD is associated to higher material costs, the advantages of the robotic system associated to lower hospital stay costs and the absence of difference in terms of personnel costs thanks to the similar operative time with respect to OPD, make the OVCs of the two techniques no longer different. Hence, the higher costs of advanced technology can be partially compensated by clinical advantages, particularly within a high-volume multidisciplinary center for both robot-assisted and pancreatic surgery. These preliminary data need confirmation by further studies.

Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: a case-matched cost-analysis between robot-assisted surgery and direct manual laparoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have reported a structured cost analysis of robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP), and none have compared the relative costs between the robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) and the direct manual laparoscopy (DML) in this setting. The aim of the present study is to address this issue by comparing surgical outcomes and costs of RDP and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies (LDP). METHODS: Eighty-eight RDP and 47 LDP performed between January 2008 and January 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Three comparable groups of 35 patients each (Si-RDP-group, Xi-RDP group, LDP-group) were obtained matching 1:1 the RDP-groups with the LDP-group. Overall costs, including overall variable costs (OVC) and fixed costs were compared using generalized linear regression model adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: The conversion rate was significantly lower in the Si-RDP-group and Xi-RDP-group: 2.9% and 0%, respectively, versus 14.3% in the LDP-group (p = 0.045). Although not statistically significant, the mean operative time was lower in Xi-RDP-group: 226 min versus 262 min for Si-RDP-group and 247 min for LDP-group. The overall post-operative complications rate and the length of hospital stay (LOS) were not significantly different between the three groups. In LDP-group, the LOS of converted cases was significantly longer: 15.6 versus 9.8 days (p = 0.039). Overall costs of LDP-group were significantly lower than RDP-groups, (p < 0.001). At multivariate analysis OVC resulted no longer statistically significantly different between LDP-group and Xi-RDP-group (p = 0.099), and between LDP-group and the RDP-groups when the spleen preservation was indicated (p = 0.115 and p = 0.261 for Si-RDP-group and Xi-RDP-group, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: RAS is more expensive than DML for DP because of higher acquisition and maintenance costs. The flattening of these differences considering only the variable costs, in a high-volume multidisciplinary center for RAS, suggests a possible optimization of the costs in this setting. RAS might be particularly indicated for minimally invasive DP when the spleen preservation is scheduled.

A "tailored" interventional and surgical management for moderate to critical acute pancreatitis in late phase: a cohort study.

PURPOSE: Several interventional procedures are available to treat moderate-to-critical acute pancreatitis (AP) in its late phase. The ongoing debate on these options, together with the scarcity of reported quality of life (QoL) information in the Literature, prompted us to conduct a review of our experience. METHODS: All the patients treated at our referral Center for moderate-to-critical AP according to Determinant-Based Classification (DBC) were retrospectively reviewed. Patients treated conservatively or operated within 4 weeks were excluded. The included patients were managed following a "tailored" interventional-surgical approach, which did not exclude the possibility to skip one or more steps of the classic "step-up" approach, based on the patient's clinical course, and divided into four groups, according to the first procedure performed: percutaneous drainage (PD), endoscopic approach (END), internal derivation (INT), and necrosectomy (NE). In-hospital and mid-term follow-up variables were analyzed. RESULTS: The study sample consisted in 47 patients: 11 patients were treated by PD, 11 by END, 13 by INT, and 12 by NE. A significant distribution of the DBC severity (p = 0.029) was registered among the four groups. Moreover, the NE group had statistically significant reduced SF-36 scores in the domain of social functioning at 3 months (p = 0.011), at 1 year (p = 0.002), and at 2 years (p = 0.001); role limitations due to physical health at 6 months (p = 0.027); and role limitations due to emotional problems at 1 year (p = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: In the "late phase" of moderate to critical AP requiring an invasive management, PD, END, INT, and NE are all effective options, depending on patents' status and necrosis location. A "tailored" interventional-surgical management could be pursued, but up-front more invasive approaches are at higher risk of worse QoL. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The manuscript was registered at clinicaltrials.gov in 04/2021 and identified with NCT04870268.

In Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Alpha-Synuclein Increases and Marks Peri-Neural Infiltration.

α-Synuclein (α-syn) is a protein involved in neuronal degeneration. However, the family of synucleins has recently been demonstrated to be involved in the mechanisms of oncogenesis by selectively accelerating cellular processes leading to cancer. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most lethal human cancers, with a specifically high neurotropism. The molecular bases of this biological behavior are currently poorly understood. Here, α-synuclein was analyzed concerning the protein expression in PDAC and the potential association with PDAC neurotropism. Tumor (PDAC) and extra-tumor (extra-PDAC) samples from 20 patients affected by PDAC following pancreatic resections were collected at the General Surgery Unit, University of Pisa. All patients were affected by moderately or poorly differentiated PDAC. The amount of α-syn was compared between tumor and extra-tumor specimen (sampled from non-affected neighboring pancreatic areas) by using in situ immuno-staining with peroxidase anti-α-syn immunohistochemistry, α-syn detection by using Western blotting, and electron microscopy by using α-syn-conjugated immuno-gold particles. All the methods consistently indicate that each PDAC sample possesses a higher amount of α-syn compared with extra-PDAC tissue. Moreover, the expression of α-syn was much higher in those PDAC samples from tumors with perineural infiltration compared with tumors without perineural infiltration.

Ileo-colic intra-corporeal anastomosis during robotic right colectomy: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of different techniques.

PURPOSE: Robotic assistance could increase the rate of ileo-colic intra-corporeal anastomosis (ICA) during robotic right colectomy (RRC). However, although robotic ICA can be accomplished with several different technical variants, it is not clear whether some of these technical details should be preferred. An evaluation of the possible advantage of one respect to another would be useful. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of literature on technical details of robotic ileo-colic ICA, from which we performed a meta-analysis of clinical outcomes. The extracted data allowed a comparative analysis regarding the outcome of overall complication (OC), bleeding rate (BR) and leakage rate (LR), between (1) mechanical anastomosis with robotic stapler, versus laparoscopic stapler, versus totally hand-sewn anastomosis and (2) closure of enterocolotomy with manual double layer, versus single layer, versus stapled. RESULTS: A total of 30 studies including 2066 patients were selected. Globally, the side-to-side, isoperistaltic anastomosis, realized with laparoscopic staplers, and double-layer closure for enterocolotomy, is the most common technique used. According to the meta-analysis, the use of robotic stapler was significantly associated with a reduction of the BR with respect to mechanical anastomosis with laparoscopic stapler or totally hand-sewn anastomosis. None of the other technical aspects significantly influenced the outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: ICA fashioning during RRC can be accomplished with several technical variants without evidence of a clear superiority of anyone of these techniques. Although the use of robotic staplers could be associated with some benefits, further studies are necessary to draw conclusions.

Use of barbed suture without fashioning the "classical" Wirsung-jejunostomy in a modified end-to-side robotic pancreatojejunostomy.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of the pancreatic stump is a critical step of pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Robot-assisted surgery (RAS) can facilitate minimally invasive challenging abdominal procedures, including pancreatojejunostomy. However, one of the major limitations of RAS stems from its lack of tactile feedback that can lead to pancreatic parenchyma laceration during knot tying or during traction on the suture. Moreover, a Wirsung-jejunostomy is not always easy to execute, especially in cases with small diameter duct. Herein, we describe and video-report the technical details of a robotic modified end-to-side invaginated robotic pancreatojejunostomy (RmPJ) with the use of barbed suture instead of the "classical" Wirsung-jejunostomy. METHODS: The RmPJ technique consists of a double layer of absorbable monofilament running barbed suture (3-0 V-Loc), the outer layer is used to invaginate the pancreatic stump. Thereafter, a small enterotomy is made in the jejunum exactly opposite to the location of the pancreatic duct for stent insertion (usually 5 Fr) inside the duct. The internal layer provides a second barbed running suture placed between the pancreatic capsule/parenchyma and the jejunal seromuscular layer. RESULTS: A total of 14 patients underwent robotic PD with RmPJ at our Institution. The mean console time was (281.36 ± 31.50 min), while the mean operative time for fashioning the RmPJ was 37.31 ± 7.80 min. Ten out of 14 patients were discharged within postoperative day 8. No clinically relevant pancreatic fistulas were encountered, while two patients developed biochemical leaks. CONCLUSIONS: RmPJ is feasible and reproducible irrespective of pancreatic duct size and parenchyma, and can enhance the surgical workflow of this operation. Specifically, the use of barbed sutures allows the exploitation of the potential advantages of the RAS, while minimizing the negative effect caused by the main disadvantage of the robotic approach, its absence of tactile feedback, by ensuring uniform tension on the continuous suture lines used, especially during the reconstructive phase of the operation.

Somatostatin administration following pancreatoduodenectomy: a case-matched comparison according to surgical technique, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists' score and Fistula Risk Score.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the controversial role of somatostatin after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), stratifying patients for the main risk factors using the most recent postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) classification and including only patients who had undergone PD with the same technique of pancreatojejunostomy. METHODS: Between November 2010 and February 2020, 218 PD procedures were carried out via personal modified pancreatojejunostomy (mPJ-PD). Somatostatin was routinely administered between 2010 and 2016, while from 2017, 97 mPJ-PD procedures without somatostatin (WS) were performed. The WS group was retrospectively compared with a control (C) group obtained with one-to-one case-control matching according to the body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists' score, and Fistula Risk Score (FRS). RESULTS: A total of 144 patients (72 WS group versus 72 C group) were compared. In the WS group. 6 patients (8.3%) developed clinically relevant POPF, compared with 8 patients (11.1%) in the C group (p = 0.656). In addition, on analyzing the subgroup of high-risk patients according to the FRS, we did not note any significant differences in POPF occurrence. Furthermore, no marked differences in the morbidity or mortality were found. Digestive bleeding and diabetes onset rates were higher in the WS group than in the control group, but not significantly so. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study confirm no benefit with the routine administration of somatostatin after PD to prevent POPF, even in high-risk patients. However, a possible role in the prevention of postoperative digestive bleeding and diabetes was observed.

The occurrence of prion protein in surgically resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Among the several new targets for the comprehension of the biology of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), Prion proteins (PrPc) deserve particular mention, since they share a marked neurotropism. Actually, PrPc could have also a role in tumorigenesis, as recently demonstrated. However, only few in vitro studies in cell cultures showed the occurrence of PrPc in PDAC cells. We aim to evaluate the presence of PrPc in vivo in PDAC tissues as a potential new biomarker. METHODS: Samples from tumors of 23 patients undergone pancreatic resections from July 2018 to May 2020 at our institution were collected and analyzed. Immunohistochemistry and western blotting of PDAC tissues were compared with control tissues. Immunohistochemistry was used also to evaluate the localization of PrPc and of CD155, a tumoral stem-cell marker. RESULTS: All cases were moderately differentiated PDAC, with perineural invasion (PNI) in 19/23 cases (83%). According to western-blot analysis, PrPc was markedly expressed in PDAC tissues (273.5 ± 44.63 OD) respect to controls (100 ± 28.35 OD, p = 0.0018). Immunohistochemistry confirmed these findings, with higher linear staining of PrPc in PDAC ducts (127.145 ± 7.56 µm vs 75.21 ± 5.01 µm, p < 0.0001). PrPc and CD155 exactly overlapped in ductal tumoral cells, highlighting the possible relationship of PrPc with cancer stemness. Finally, PrPc expression related with cancer stage and there was a potential correspondence with PNI. CONCLUSIONS: Our work provides evidence for increased levels of PrPc in PDAC. This might contribute to cancer aggressiveness and provides a potentially new biomarker. Work is in progress to decipher clinical implications.

Pancreatic resections in elderly patients with high American Society of Anesthesiologists' risk score: a view from a tertiary care center.

BACKGROUND: More than 60% of patients affected by pancreatic cancer are ≥ 65 years of age. Surgery represents the only potentially curative treatment for malignant pancreatic neoplasia and a useful treatment for benign diseases. AIM: To evaluate outcomes in elderly patients with ASA risk score 4 who underwent pancreatic resection compared to younger patients and elderly patients with lower anesthesiological risk. METHODS: A consecutive series of 345 patients underwent pancreatic resection between 2010 and 2017 was reviewed. We compared three groups based on age at the time of surgery: < 65 years (group A), 65-74 years (group B), and ≥ 75 years (group C). Patients in group C were split into two subgroups, ASA 1-3 versus ASA 4, and compared. RESULTS: Group A consisted of 117 (34%) patients, group B 128 (37%) patients, and group C 100 (29%) patients. Group C had a significantly higher incidence of comorbidity and ASA 4 status (p < 0.05), and of overall post-operative complications (p < 0.01), because of the higher incidence of post-operative medical complications. No differences in terms of overall surgical complications and post-operative mortality were reported. The mean overall survival was significantly lower for group C (p < 0.01), with no difference in mortality for cancer. Within group C, no differences were reported regarding surgical complications (p = 0.59), mortality (p = 0.34), and mean overall survival (p = 0.53) between ASA 1-3 and ASA 4 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced age should not preclude elderly patients with pancreatic diseases from being treated surgically, and ASA 4 in subjects aged ≥ 75 years should not be an absolute contraindication.

Robotic-assisted versus open left pancreatectomy for cystic tumours: A single-centre experience.

BACKGROUND: Cystic pancreatic lesions (CPLs) are being identified increasingly, and some benefit from surgical treatment. With the increasing use of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) for neoplasms of the pancreas, the aim of the present comparative study is to establish whether the RAS offered any advantages over conventional open surgery (OS) in the management of CPLs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-seven out of 37 robot-assisted left-sided pancreatectomy (LSP) performed between January 2010 and April 2017 were carried out for CPLs. The surgical outcome and histopathology were compared retrospectively with a control group of 27 patients who had undergone open LSP for CPLs, selected using a one-to-one case-matched methodology (OS-Group) from the prospectively collected institutional database. RESULTS: The spleen was preserved in a significantly higher percentage of patients in the RAS-group (63% vs. 33.3%,P < 0.05). There was no difference in the post-operative course (pancreatic fistula and morbidity) between the two groups. The median post-operative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the RAS-group: 8 days (range 3-25) versus 12 days (range 7-26) in the OS-group (P < 0.01). No conversion to open approach was reported in the RAS-group. CONCLUSIONS: Robotically assisted LSP is a safe and effective procedure. It is accompanied by a significantly higher spleen preservation rate compared to the open approach. In addition, because of the reduced trauma, RAS incurred a shorter post-operative hospital stay and faster return to full recovery, particularly important in patients undergoing surgery for relative indications. However, these benefits of RAS for LSP require confirmation by prospective randomised controlled studies.

Robotic-assisted surgery for colorectal liver metastasis: A single-centre experience.

Background: Although minimally invasive surgery (MIS) of the liver is increasingly widespread, its role in the treatment of colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) remains uncertain. In this setting, the role of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has not been significantly evaluated yet. The aim of this study was to report our experience with RAS for treatment of CRLM. Material and Methods: Prospectively collected surgical and oncologic data on all of the robotic-assisted liver resections for CRLM performed at our centre were retrieved from the institutional database and retrospectively analysed. Intra-operative ultrasound (US) was obtained with a dedicated robotic probe using the TilePro™ function. Results: Twenty patients underwent robotic-assisted resection of CRLM between May 2012 and April 2018. Six patients (30%) had multiple synchronous CRLM resections (median = 2; range 2-4). The tumour size averaged 3.0 ± 1.8 cm. All of the lesions were removed using a parenchymal-sparing approach, with R0 resection margins. Mean hospital stay was 4.7 ± 1.8 days. The mean follow-up was 22.5 ± 19.5 months. During the study period, there were no local recurrences, while 9 patients (45%) developed new systemic metastasis. All patients are still alive as of September 2018 with 1- and 3-year disease-free survival of 89.5% and 35.8%, respectively. Conclusions: In our experience, RAS for CRLM surgical treatment was feasible and played a positive role even in patients with multiple metastases and previous or synchronous surgery. RAS seemed to be oncologically effective in this setting, as no patients experienced local relapse in the treated area.

Structured cost analysis of robotic TME resection for rectal cancer: a comparison between the da Vinci Si and Xi in a single surgeon's experience.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted surgery by the da Vinci Si appears to benefit rectal cancer surgery in selected patients, but still has some limitations, one of which is its high costs. Preliminary studies have indicated that the use of the new da Vinci Xi provides some added advantages, but their impact on cost is unknown. The aim of the present study is to compare surgical outcomes and costs of rectal cancer resection by the two platforms, in a single surgeon's experience. METHODS: From April 2010 to April 2017, 90 robotic rectal resections were performed, with either the da Vinci Si (Si-RobTME) or the da Vinci Xi (Xi-RobTME). Based on CUSUM analysis, two comparable groups of 40 consecutive Si-RobTME and 40 consecutive Xi-RobTME were obtained from the prospectively collected database and used for the present retrospective comparative study. Data costs were analysed based on the level of experience on the proficiency-gain curve (p-g curve) by the surgeon with each platform. RESULTS: In both groups, two homogeneous phases of the p-g curve were identified: Si1 and Xi1: cases 1-19, Si2 and Xi2: cases 20-40. A significantly higher number of full RAS operations were achieved in the Xi-RobTME group (p < 0.001). A statistically significant reduction in operating time (OT) during Si2 and Xi2 phase was observed (p < 0.001), accompanied by reduced overall variable costs (OVC), personnel costs (PC) and consumable costs (CC) (p < 0.001). All costs were lower in the Xi2 phase compared to Si2 phase: OT 265 versus 290 min (p = 0.052); OVC 7983 versus 10231.9 (p = 0.009); PC 1151.6 versus 1260.2 (p = 0.052), CC 3464.4 versus 3869.7 (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our experience confirms a significant reduction of costs with increasing surgeon's experience with both platforms. However, the economic gain was higher with the Xi with shorter OT, reduced PC and CC, in addition to a significantly larger number of cases performed by the fully robotic approach.

Gastrointestinal stromal tumours of stomach: Robot-assisted excision with the da Vinci Surgical System regardless of size and location site.

Aims: The role of minimally invasive surgery of gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) of the stomach remains uncertain especially for large and/or difficult located tumours. We are hereby presenting a single-centre series of robot-assisted resections using the da Vinci Surgical System (Si or Xi). Subjects and Methods: Data of patients undergoing robot-assisted treatment of gastric GIST were retrieved from the prospectively collected institutional database and a retrospective analysis was performed. Patients were stratified according to size and location of the tumour. Difficult cases (DCs) were considered for size if tumour was >50 mm and/or for location if the tumour was Type II, III or IV sec. Privette/Al-Thani classification. Results: Between May 2010 and February 2017, 12 consecutive patients underwent robot-assisted treatment of GIST at our institution. DCs were 10/12 cases (83.3%), of which 6/10 (50%) for location, 2/10 (25%) for size and 2/10 (25%) for both. The da Vinci Si was used in 8 patients, of which 6 (75%) were DC, and the da Vinci Xi in 4, all of which (100%) were DC. In all patients, excision was by wedge resection. All lesions had microscopically negative resection margins. There was no conversion to open surgery, no tumour ruptures or spillage and no intraoperative complications. Conclusion: Our experience suggests a positive role of the robot da Vinci in getting gastric GIST removal with a conservative approach, regardless of size and location site. Comparative studies with a greater number of patients are necessary for a more robust assessment.

Robot-assisted total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: case-matched comparison of short-term surgical and functional outcomes between the da Vinci Xi and Si.

BACKGROUND: Robotic rectal resection with da Vinci Si has some technical limitations, which could be overcome by the new da Vinci Xi. We compare short-term surgical and functional outcomes following robotic rectal resection with total mesorectal excision for cancer, with the da Vinci Xi (Xi-RobTME group) and the da Vinci Si (Si-RobTME group). METHODS: The first consecutive 30 Xi-RobTME were compared with a Si-RobTME control group of 30 patients, selected using a one-to-one case-matched methodology from our prospectively collected Institutional database, comprising all cases performed between April 2010 and September 2016 by a single surgeon. Perioperative outcomes were compared. The impact of minimally invasive TME on autonomic function and quality of life was analyzed with specific questionnaires. RESULTS: The docking and overall operative time were shorter in the Xi-RobTME group (p < 0.001 and p < 0.05 respectively). The mean differences of overall operative time and docking time were -33.8 min (95% CI -5.1 to -64.5) and -6 min (95% CI -4.1 to -7.9), respectively. A fully-robotic approach with complete splenic flexure mobilization was used in 30/30 (100%) of the Xi-RobTME cases and in 7/30 (23%) of the Si-RobTME group (p < 0.001). The hybrid approach in males and patients with BMI > 25 kg/m2 was necessary in ten patients (45 vs. 0%, p < 0.001) and in six patients (37 vs. 0%, p < 0.05), in the Si-RobTME and Xi-RobTME groups, respectively. There were no differences in conversion rate, mean hospital stay, pathological data, and in functional outcomes between the two groups before and at 1 year after surgery. CONCLUSION: The technical advantages offered by the da Vinci Xi seem to be mainly associated with a shorter docking and operative time and with superior ability to perform a fully-robotic approach. Clinical and functional outcomes seem not to be improved, with the introduction of the new Xi platform.

Robotic Colorectal Resection With and Without the Use of the New Da Vinci Table Motion: A Case-Matched Study.

BACKGROUND: The da Vinci Table Motion (dVTM) is a new device that enables patients to be repositioned with instruments in place within the abdomen, and without undocking the robot. The present study was designed to compare operative and short-term outcomes of patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery with the da Vinci Xi system, with or without use of the dVTM. METHODS: Ten patients underwent robotic colorectal resection for cancer with the use of dVTM (Xi-dVTM group) between May 2015 and October 2015 at our center. The intraoperative and short-term clinical outcome were compared, using a case-control methodology (propensity scores approach to create 1:2 matched pairs), with a similar group of patients who underwent robotic colorectal surgery for cancer without the use of the dVTM device (Xi-only group). RESULTS: Overall robotic operative time was shorter in the Xi-dVTM group ( P = .04). Operations were executed fully robotic in all Xi-dVTM cases, while 2 cases of the Xi-only group required conversion to open surgery because of bulky tumors and difficult exposure. Postoperative medical complications were higher in the Xi-only group ( P = .024). CONCLUSIONS: In this preliminary experience, the use of the new dVTM with the da Vinci Xi in colorectal surgery, by overcoming the limitations of the fixed positions of the patient, enhanced the workflow and resulted in improved exposure of the operative field. Further studies with a greater number of patients are needed to confirm these benefits of the dVTM-da Vinci Xi robotically assisted colorectal surgery.

Full Robotic Colorectal Resections for Cancer Combined With Other Major Surgical Procedures: Early Experience With the da Vinci Xi.

BACKGROUND: The da Vinci Xi has been developed to overcome some of the limitations of the previous platform, thereby increasing the acceptance of its use in robotic multiorgan surgery. METHODS: Between January 2015 and October 2015, 10 patients with synchronous tumors of the colorectum and others abdominal organs underwent robotic combined resections with the da Vinci Xi. Trocar positions respected the Universal Port Placement Guidelines provided by Intuitive Surgical for "left lower quadrant," with trocars centered on the umbilical area, or shifted 2 to 3 cm to the right or to the left, depending on the type of combined surgical procedure. RESULTS: All procedures were completed with the full robotic technique. Simultaneous procedures in same quadrant or left quadrant and pelvis, or left/right and upper, were performed with a single docking/single targeting approach; in cases of left/right quadrant or right quadrant/pelvis, we performed a dual-targeting operation. No external collisions or problems related to trocar positions were noted. No patient experienced postoperative surgical complications and the mean hospital stay was 6 days. CONCLUSIONS: The high success rate of full robotic colorectal resection combined with other surgical interventions for synchronous tumors, suggest the efficacy of the da Vinci Xi in this setting.

Minimally Invasive Surgery for the Treatment of Moderate to Critical Acute Pancreatitis: A Case-matched Comparison With the Traditional Open Approach Over 10 years.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to compare short-term and midterm outcomes between patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) treated with minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and patients treated with open necrosectomy (ON). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We compared data of all patients who had undergone MIS for AP with a similar group of patients with ON patients between January 2012 and June 2021 using a case-matched methodology based on AP severity and patient characteristics. Inhospital and midterm follow-up variables, including quality-of-life assessment, were evaluated. RESULTS: Starting from a whole series of 79 patients with moderate to critical AP admitted to our referral center, the final study sample consisted of 24 patients (12 MIS and 12 ON). Postoperative (18.7±10.9 vs. 30.3±21.7 d; P =0.05) and overall hospitalization (56.3±17.4 vs. 76.9±39.4 d; P =0.05) were lower in the MIS group. Moreover, the Short-Form 36 scores in the ON group were statistically significantly lower in role limitations because of emotional problems ( P =0.002) and health changes ( P =0.03) at 3 and 6 months and because of emotional problems ( P =0.05), emotional well-being ( P =0.02), and general health ( P =0.007) at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: MIS for the surgical management of moderate to critical AP seems to be a good option, as it could provide more chances for a better midterm quality of life compared with ON. Further studies are needed to confirm our findings.

Delayed gastric emptying after pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy: Comparison between traditional open surgery and full-robotic approach with da Vinci Xi.

INTRODUCTION: Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is a frequent complication after pancreatoduodenectomy, especially after pylorus preservation (Pp). We evaluated the effect of a fully robotic approach with da Vinci Xi on DGE after PpPD. METHODS: Open and robotic PDs were performed in 353 and 50 cases, respectively, from January 2009 to March 2022. We compared the clinical outcomes and incidence of clinically relevant DGE between robotic PpPD (R-PpPD) and open PpPD after one-to-one case-control matching. RESULTS: Each group consisted of 30 patients. Clinically relevant DGE was less common after R-PpPD (3/30 [10%] vs. 10/30 cases [33.3%], p = 0.028). The median length of hospital stay (LoS) was significantly lower in the R-PpPD group (10 vs. 15 days, p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: The reduced tissue trauma by the minimally invasive robotic approach is associated with a lower incidence of DGE, reducing the LoS and encouraging PpPD performed using the fully robotic approach.

Comparison of different pancreatic stump management strategies during robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) represents the most feared complication after distal pancreatectomy, and the possible role of robotic assistance in this setting is poorly investigated so far. METHODS: We analysed short-term outcomes of 88 patients who had undergone robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RDP), dividing them according to pancreatic stump management: selective Wirsung duct ligation/hand sewn suture (WirsLIG group), use of robotic EndoWrist staplers (RobSTAP group), and use of laparoscopic staplers (LapSTAP group). RESULTS: Mean operative time resulted significantly longer in WirsLIG group (291.1 ± 77.21 min vs. 245 ± 56.22 min in RobSTAP group vs. 221.77 ± 64.64 min in LapSTAP group). No significant differences were found in median hospital stay and in POPF occurrence. CONCLUSIONS: No strategy for pancreatic stump management during RDP has proven superior to the others in reducing POPF rates. The hand-sewn technique resulted more time consuming, nevertheless it remains essential where there is not enough space to insert the stapler.