Analysis of technical failure after 1,613 surgical microwave ablations: A propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Microwave ablation is becoming increasingly common for the treatment of liver tumors. Despite numerous studies aimed at identifying risk factors for local recurrence after microwave ablation, a consensus on modifiable risk factors for failure remains elusive, partly because of the limited statistical power of these studies. This study investigated the incidence of technical failure after microwave ablation, encompassing both incomplete ablation and local recurrence, and aimed to identify modifiable factors that reduce technical failure. METHODS: This retrospective review included patients who underwent surgical microwave ablation at a high-volume institution between October 2006 and March 2023. Univariate analysis, multivariate analysis, and propensity score matching were performed to identify risk factors for technical failure. RESULTS: A total of 1,613 surgical microwave ablations were performed on 3,035 tumors, with 226 instances (14% per procedure, 7.4% per tumor) of technical failure. Incomplete ablation occurred at a rate of 1.7% per tumor, whereas local recurrence was identified in 6.5% of ablations in per-tumor analysis. Body mass index >25 was significant for failure (odds ratio, 1.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-2.11; P < .05), suggesting that more difficult targeting may lead to increased technical failure rates. African American race (odds ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.16-2.27; P < .05), pre-microwave ablation transarterial chemoembolization (odds ratio, 1.54; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-2.21; P < .05), and previous ablation (odds ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-2.29; P < .05) were found to be statistically significant. CONCLUSION: On the basis of the largest microwave ablation database available to date, this study identified novel modifiable and nonmodifiable risk factors of microwave ablation failure. These results can lead to decreasing technical failure rates after microwave ablation.

Conversion to open surgery in obese patients undergoing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: results from a multicenter analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is considered a standard approach it still presents a non-negligible rate of conversion to open that is mainly related to some difficulty factors, as obesity. The aim of this study is to analyze the preoperative factors associated with conversion in obese patients with MIDP. METHODS: In this multicenter study, all obese patients who underwent MIDP at 18 international expert centers were included. The preoperative factors associated with conversion to open surgery were analyzed. RESULTS: Out of 436 patients, 91 (20.9%) underwent conversion to open, presenting higher blood loss, longer operative time and similar rate of major complications. Twenty (22%) patients received emergent conversion. At univariate analysis, the type of approach, radiological invasion of adjacent organs, preoperative enlarged lymphnodes and ASA ≥ III were significantly associated with conversion to open. At multivariate analysis, robotic approach showed a significantly lower conversion rate (14.6 % vs 27.3%, OR = 2.380, p = 0.001). ASA ≥ III (OR = 2.391, p = 0.002) and preoperative enlarged lymphnodes (OR = 3.836, p = 0.003) were also independently associated with conversion. CONCLUSION: Conversion rate is significantly lower in patients undergoing robotic approach. Radiological enlarged lymphnodes and ASA ≥ III are also associated with conversion to open. Conversion is associated with poorer perioperative outcomes, especially in case of intraoperative hemorrhage.

Predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastasis using deep learning on prechemotherapy cross-sectional imaging.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Deep learning models (DLMs) are applied across domains of health sciences to generate meaningful predictions. DLMs make use of neural networks to generate predictions from discrete data inputs. This study employs DLM on prechemotherapy cross-sectional imaging to predict patients' response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: Adult patients with colorectal liver metastasis who underwent surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy were included. A DLM was trained on computed tomography images using attention-based multiple-instance learning. A logistic regression model incorporating clinical parameters of the Fong clinical risk score was used for comparison. Both model performances were benchmarked against the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria. A receiver operating curve was created and resulting area under the curve (AUC) was determined. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients were included, with 33,619 images available for study inclusion. Ninety-five percent of patients underwent 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy with oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan. Sixty percent of the patients were categorized as chemotherapy responders (30% reduction in tumor diameter). The DLM had an AUC of 0.77. The AUC for the clinical model was 0.41. CONCLUSIONS: Image-based DLM for prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases was superior to a clinical-based model. These results demonstrate potential to identify nonresponders to chemotherapy and guide select patients toward earlier curative resection.

Outcomes after Surgical Microwave Ablation for the Treatment of Colorectal Liver Metastasis.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cause of cancer mortality worldwide. Of these, approximately 25% will have liver metastasis. We performed 394 microwave ablations (MWAs) and analyzed outcomes for survival and ablation failure. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent a surgical MWA at a single-center high-volume institution from October 2006 to September 2022 using a prospectively maintained database. The primary outcome was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 394 operations were performed on 328 patients with 842 tumors undergoing MWA. Median tumor size was 1.5 cm (range 0.4 to 7.0 cm), with the median number of tumors ablated per operation being 1 (range 1 to 11). A laparoscopic approach was used 77.9% of the time. Concomitant procedures were performed 63% of the time, most commonly hepatectomy (22.3%), cholecystectomy (17.5%), and colectomy (6.6%). Clavien-Dindo grade III or IV complication occurred in 12 patients (3.6%), and all of these patients had undergone concomitant procedures. Mortality within 30 days occurred in 4 patients (1.2%). The rate of incomplete ablation was 1.5% per tumor. Local recurrence occurred at a rate of 6.3% per tumor. Black patients were found to have a higher incidence of incomplete ablation and local recurrence. One-year survival probability was 91% (95% CI 87.9 to 94.3), with a mean overall survival of 57.6 months (95% CI 49.9 to 65.4 months). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical MWA offers a low-morbidity approach to treatment of colorectal liver metastasis, with low rate of failure. This large series reviews the outcomes of MWA as definitive treatment for colorectal liver metastasis.

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.

10 years, 100 robotic major hepatectomies: a single-center experience.

INTRODUCTION: Adoption of robotic liver resections has been gradually increasing throughout the HPB surgical community over the past decade. Currently there is limited literature which demonstrates a significant benefit of robotic surgery for major hepatectomies over open or laparoscopic. As one of the first centers to develop a robotic HPB program, we have experienced improved outcomes over time with increasing utilization of robotics. Herein, we present our 10-year experience and outcomes for major robotic liver resections. METHODS: From 2012 to 2022, 361 robotic liver procedures were performed, including 100 major hepatectomies. A retrospective data review of the electronic medical record was performed evaluating outcomes after robotic major hepatectomy. Outcomes for the first 50 cases (Group A) and second 50 cases (Group B) were compared to identify any improvements in practice. Demographic and clinical outcome variables were analyzed. Data were assessed for normality, and Wilcoxon rank-sum, χ2 tests, and a logistic regression model were performed appropriate for the data. Stata v.17 was utilized, and significance was set as p < .05. RESULTS: There was no difference in median operative time (258 vs 256 min), EBL (500 vs 500 mL), median LOS (5 vs 3.5 days), 90-day readmission (14% vs 24%), major complications (14% vs 20%), and 90-day mortality (6% vs 4%) between early and late cases, respectively. ICU admissions and conversion rates were significantly lower in group B (14.0% vs 48.0%), while expert level difficulty indices were higher (82% vs 58%). CONCLUSION: Development of a robotic liver program with good outcomes is feasible over time. Our data suggest that our institutional learning curve for robotic major hepatectomy plateaued at approximately 50 cases.

Surgical microwave ablation for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in 791 operations.

INTRODUCTION: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality and often arises in the setting of cirrhosis. The present series reviews outcomes following 791 operations. METHODS: Retrospective review surgical MWA for HCC from March 2007 through December 2022 at a high-volume institution was performed using a prospective database. Primary outcome was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 791 operations in 623 patients and 1156 HCC tumors were treated with surgical MWA. Median tumor size was 2 cm (range 0.25-10 cm) with an average of 1 tumor ablated per operation (range 1-7 tumors). Nearly 90 % of patients had cirrhosis with a median MELD score of 8 (IQR = 6-11). Mortality within 30 days occurred in 13 patients (1.6 %). Per tumor, the rate of incomplete ablation was 2.25 % and local recurrence was 2.95 %. Previous ablation and tumor size were risk factors for recurrence. One-year overall survival was 82.0 % with a median overall survival of 36.5 months (95 % CI 15.7-93.7) and median disease-free survival of 15.9 months (range 5.7-37.3 months). CONCLUSION: Surgical MWA offers a low-morbidity approach for treatment of HCC, affording low rates of incomplete ablation and local recurrence.

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma in obese patients.

BACKGROUND: Robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) is associated with a lower conversion rate and less blood loss than laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). LDP has similar oncological outcomes as open surgery in PDAC. The aim of this study was to compare perioperative and oncological outcomes in obese patients with RDP versus LDP for PDAC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospectively, all obese patients who underwent RDP or LDP for PDAC between 2012 and 2022 at 12 international expert centres were included. RESULTS: out of 372, 81 patients were included. All baseline features were comparable between the two groups. RDP was associated with decreased blood loss (495mlLDP vs. 188mlRDP; p = 0.003), lower conversion rate (13.5%RDP vs. 36.4%LDP; p = 0.019) and lower rate of Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications (13.5%RDP vs. 36.4%LDP; p = 0.019). Overall and disease-free survival were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: In obese patients with left-sided PDAC, the robotic approach was associated with improved intraoperative outcomes and fewer severe complications.

SAGES/AHPBA guidelines for the use of microwave and radiofrequency liver ablation for the surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma or colorectal liver metastases less than 5 cm.

BACKGROUND: Primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) represent the liver's two most common malignant neoplasms. Liver-directed therapies such as ablation have become part of multidisciplinary therapies despite a paucity of data. Therefore, an expert panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations regarding the use of microwave ablation (MWA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for HCC or CRLM less than 5 cm in diameter in patients ineligible for other therapies. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted for six key questions (KQ) regarding MWA or RFA for solitary liver tumors in patients deemed poor candidates for first-line therapy. Subject experts used the GRADE methodology to formulate evidence-based recommendations and future research recommendations. RESULTS: The panel addressed six KQs pertaining to MWA vs. RFA outcomes and laparoscopic vs. percutaneous MWA. The available evidence was poor quality and individual studies included both HCC and CRLM. Therefore, the six KQs were condensed into two, recognizing that these were two disparate tumor groups and this grouping was somewhat arbitrary. With this significant limitation, the panel suggested that in appropriately selected patients, either MWA or RFA can be safe and feasible. However, this recommendation must be implemented cautiously when simultaneously considering patients with two disparate tumor biologies. The limited data suggested that laparoscopic MWA of anatomically more difficult tumors has a compensatory higher morbidity profile compared to percutaneous MWA, while achieving similar overall 1-year survival. Thus, either approach can be appropriate depending on patient-specific factors (very low certainty of evidence). CONCLUSION: Given the weak evidence, these guidelines provide modest guidance regarding liver ablative therapies for HCC and CRLM. Liver ablation is just one component of a multimodal approach and its use is currently limited to a highly selected population. The quality of the existing data is very low and therefore limits the strength of the guidelines.

Current progress in robotic hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery at a high-volume center.

There has been steady growth in the adoption of robotic HPB procedures world-wide over the past 20 years, but most of this increase has occurred only recently. Not surprisingly, the vast majority of robotics has been in the United States, with very few, select centers of adoption in Italy, South Korea, and Brazil, to name a few. We began our robotic HPB program in 2008, well before almost all other centers in the world, with the most notable exception of Giullianotti and colleagues. Our program began gradually, with smaller cases carefully selected to optimize the strengths of the original robotic platform and included complex biliary and pancreatic resections. We performed the first reported series of choledochojejunostomy for benign biliary strictures and first series of completion cholecystectomies. We began performing robotic distal pancreatectomies and longitudinal pancreaticojejunostomies, reporting our early experience for each of these procedures. Over time we progressed to robotic pancreaticoduodenectomies. Initially, these were performed with planned conversions until we were able to optimize efficiency. Now we have performed over 200 robotic whipples, reaching a 100% robotic completion rate by 2020. Finally, we have added robotic major hepatectomies, including resections for hilar cholangiocarcinoma to our repertoire. Since the program began, we have performed over 1600 robotic HPB cases. Outcomes from our program have shown superior lymph node harvest, lower DGE rates, shorter hospitalizations, and fewer rehab admissions with similar overall complications to open and laparoscopic procedures, signifying that over time a robotic HPB program is not only feasible but advantageous as well.

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in obese patients.

BACKGROUND: Although robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) has a lower conversion rate to open surgery and causes less blood loss than laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), clear evidence on the impact of the surgical approach on morbidity is lacking. Prior studies have shown a higher rate of complications among obese patients undergoing pancreatectomy. The primary aim of this study is to compare short-term outcomes of RDP vs. LDP in patients with a BMI ≥ 30. METHODS: In this multicenter study, all obese patients who underwent RDP or LDP for any indication between 2012 and 2022 at 18 international expert centers were included. The baseline characteristics underwent inverse probability treatment weighting to minimize allocation bias. RESULTS: Of 446 patients, 219 (50.2%) patients underwent RDP. The median age was 60 years, the median BMI was 33 (31-36), and the preoperative diagnosis was ductal adenocarcinoma in 21% of cases. The conversion rate was 19.9%, the overall complication rate was 57.8%, and the 90-day mortality rate was 0.7% (3 patients). RDP was associated with a lower complication rate (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52-0.89; p = 0.005), less blood loss (150 vs. 200 ml; p < 0.001), fewer blood transfusion requirements (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.15-0.50; p < 0.001) and a lower Comprehensive Complications Index (8.7 vs. 8.9, p < 0.001) than LPD. RPD had a lower conversion rate (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.19-0.39; p < 0.001) and achieved better spleen preservation rate (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.13-3.39; p = 0.016) than LPD. CONCLUSIONS: In obese patients, RDP is associated with a lower conversion rate, fewer complications and better short-term outcomes than LPD.

Expanding the utility of robotics for pancreaticoduodenectomy: a 10-year review and comparison to international benchmarks in pancreatic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) is an emerging alternative to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). Although RPD offers various theoretical advantages, it is used in less than 10% of all pancreaticoduodenectomies. The aim of this study was to report our 10-year experience and compare RPD outcomes with international benchmarks for OPD. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained institutional database was performed of consecutive patients who underwent RPD between January 2011 and December 2021. Patients were categorized into low-risk and high-risk groups according to the selection criteria set by the benchmark study. Their outcomes were compared to the international benchmark cut off values. Outcomes were then evaluated over time to identify improvements in practice and establish a learning curve. RESULTS: Of 201 RPDs, 36 were low-risk and 165 high-risk patients. Compared to the OPD benchmarks, outcomes of low-risk patients were within the cutoff values. High-risk patients were outside the cutoff for blood transfusions (26% vs. ≤ 23%), overall complications (78% vs. ≤ 73%), grade I-II complications (68% vs. ≤ 62%), and readmissions (22% vs ≤ 21%). Oncologic outcomes for high-risk patients were within benchmark cutoffs. Cases at the end of the learning curve included more pancreatic cancer (42% from 17%) and fewer low-risk patients (10% from 24%) than those at the beginning. After 41 RPD there was a decline in conversion rates and operative time. Between 95 and 143 cases operative time, transfusion rates, and LOS declined significantly. Complications did not differ over time. CONCLUSION: RPD yields results comparable to the established benchmarks in OPD in both low- and high-risk patients. Along the learning curve, RPD evolved with the inclusion of more high-risk cases while outcomes remained within benchmarks. Addition of a robotic HPB surgery fellowship did not compromise outcomes. These results suggest that RPD may be an option for high-risk patients at specialized centers.

External validation of the Japanese difficulty score for laparoscopic hepatectomy in patients undergoing robotic-assisted hepatectomy.

INTRODUCTION: The Japanese difficulty score (JDS) categorizes laparoscopic hepatectomy into low, intermediate, and high complexity procedures, and correlates with operative and postoperative outcomes. We sought to perform a validation study to determine if the JDS correlates with operative and postoperative indicators of surgical complexity for patients undergoing robotic-assisted hepatectomy. METHODS: Retrospective review of 657 minimally invasive hepatectomy procedures was performed between January 2008 through March 2019. Outcomes included operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), blood transfusion, complications, post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF), length of stay, 30-day readmission, and 30-day and 90-day mortality. Patients were grouped based on JDS defined as: low (< 4), intermediate (4-6), and high (7 +) complexity procedures. Statistical comparisons were analyzed by ANOVA or χ2 test. RESULTS: 241 of 657 patients underwent robotic-assisted resection. Of these patients, 137 were included in the analysis based on JDS: 25 low, 58 intermediate, and 54 high. High JDS was associated with more major resections (≥ 4 contiguous segments) versus minor resections (median JDS 8 vs. 5, P < 0.0001). High JDS was associated with significantly longer operative times, higher EBL, and more blood transfusions. High JDS was associated with higher rates of PHLF at 16.7%, compared with 5.2% intermediate and 0.0% low, (P = 0.018). Complication rates, 30-day readmissions, and mortality rates were similar between groups. Median LOS was longer in patients with high JDS compared with intermediate and low (4 days vs. 3 days vs. 2 days; P = 0.0005). DISCUSSION: Higher JDS was associated with multiple indicators of operative complexity, including greater extent of resection, increased operative time, EBL, blood transfusion, PHLF, and LOS. This validation study supports the ability of the JDS to categorize patients undergoing robotic-assisted hepatectomy by complexity.

The importance of robotic surgery training in HPB fellowship: a survey of the 2022 AHPBA fellows.

BACKGROUND: The 2022 incoming fellows' expectations for their robotics training, as well as their perceptions of the utility of the surgical robot, are not well defined. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of 24 AHPBA fellows in 2022, analyzed with descriptive statistics and Spearman's rho. RESULTS: Of 33 current AHPBA fellows, 22 completed the survey (66.7%). Study participants had limited-to-moderate experience with robotics prior to fellowship (mean 2.5 ± SD 1.1; range 1-4). Most participants agreed that robotics influenced their fellowship choice (mean 4.14 ± SD 0.87; range 1-5), would make then more marketable (mean 4.77 ± SD 0.52; range 1-5) and improve job prospects (mean 4.68 ± SD 0.87; range 1-5). Of the study participants, 55% responded that robotics training is "essential" in fellowship, while 64% responded that it is "essential" for their careers. Fellows were only slightly satisfied with overall robotics training within their respective programs (mean 3.44 ± SD 1.17; range 1-5) The majority (73.7%) expect that robotics will comprise <25% of their training. Notably, the majority (75%) have no formal robotics training curriculum. DISCUSSION: This survey identifies potential gaps where robotics training could be improved for future incoming AHPBA fellows.

Major hepatectomy in elderly patients: possible benefit from robotic platform utilization.

INTRODUCTION: Robotic surgery has been increasingly utilized, yet its application for hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) procedures remains low due to technical complexity, perceived financial burden, and unproven clinical benefits. We hypothesized that the robotic approach would be associated with improved clinical outcomes following major hepatectomy compared with the laparoscopic approach among elderly patients who would benefit from the advantages of minimally invasive surgery. METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent major hepatectomy between January 2010 and December 2021 at Carolinas Medical Center was performed. Inclusion criteria were age ≥ 65 years and major hepatectomy of three segments or more. Patients who underwent multiple liver resections, vascular/biliary reconstruction, or concomitant extrahepatic procedures (except cholecystectomy) were excluded. Categorical variables were compared using Chi-square or Fisher's exact test when more than 20% of cells had expected frequencies less than five, and Wilcoxon two-sample or Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for continuous or ordinal variables. Results are described as median and interquartile range (IQR). Multivariate analyses were used on postoperative admission days. RESULTS: There were 399 major hepatectomies performed during this time period, of which 125 met the criteria and were included. There were no differences in perioperative demographics among patients who underwent robotic hepatectomy (RH, n = 39) and laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH, n = 32). There was no difference in operative time, blood loss, or major complication rates. However, RH had lower rates of conversion to an open procedure (2.6% versus 31.3%, p = 0.002), shorter length of hospital stay [LOS, 4 (3-7) versus 6 (4-8.5) days, p ≤ 0.0001], cumulative LOS [4 (3-7) versus 6 (4.5-9) days, p ≤ 0.0001], and lower rates of intensive care unit (ICU) admission (7.7% versus 75%, p ≤ 0.001), with a trend toward fewer rehabilitation requirements. CONCLUSIONS: Robot major hepatectomy shows clinical advantages in elderly patients, including shorter hospital and ICU stays. These advantages, as well as reduced rehabilitation requirements associated with minimally invasive surgery, could overcome the current perceived financial disadvantages of robotic hepatectomy.

Robotic pancreatic necrosectomy and internal drainage for walled-off pancreatic necrosis.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic necrosectomy with concomitant internal drainage is a single-stage treatment option for walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN). However, an optimal minimally invasive technique has not been established. We evaluated the safety and single-intervention success rate of robotic pancreatic necrosectomy and internal drainage. METHODS: Patients with WOPN undergoing robotic pancreatic necrosectomy and internal drainage at a single institution from 2011-2022 were identified. The primary outcome was the rate of clinical symptom resolution following the index surgical intervention. RESULTS: 57 patients underwent robotic pancreatic necrosectomy and internal drainage, consisting of robotic cystgastrostomy (RCG, n = 37), robotic cystjejunostomy (RCJ, n = 13) and robotic fistulojejunostomy (RFJ, n = 7). Surgery was performed a median of 102 (range 28-1153) days following the onset of necrotizing pancreatitis. The median operative time was 187 (91-344) minutes and there were 2 (3.5%) conversions. The median length of hospital stay was 4 (2-38) days. Postoperative morbidity was 11%, and there was one (1.8%) 90-day mortality. At a median follow-up of 5.5 months, 53 (93%) patients had clinical symptom resolution after their index procedure and did not require any reintervention. CONCLUSION: In select patients, robotic pancreatic necrosectomy and internal drainage is safe and achieves a high single-intervention success rate.

Educational Scoring System in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Is It the Right Time to Standardize?

Background and Objectives: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is one of the most performed surgeries worldwide. Procedure difficulty and patient outcomes depend on several factors which are not considered in the current literature, including the learning curve, generating confusing and subjective results. This study aims to create a scoring system to calculate the learning curve of LC based on hepatobiliopancreatic (HPB) experts' opinions during an educational course. Materials and Methods: A questionnaire was submitted to the panel of experts attending the HPB course at Research Institute against Digestive Cancer-IRCAD (Strasbourg, France) from 27-29 October 2022. Experts scored the proposed variables according to their degree of importance in the learning curve using a Likert scale from 1 (not useful) to 5 (very useful). Variables were included in the composite scoring system only if more than 75% of experts ranked its relevance in the learning curve assessment ≥4. A positive or negative value was assigned to each variable based on its effect on the learning curve. Results: Fifteen experts from six different countries attended the IRCAD HPB course and filled out the questionnaire. Ten variables were finally included in the learning curve scoring system (i.e., patient body weight/BMI, patient previous open surgery, emergency setting, increased inflammatory levels, presence of anatomical bile duct variation(s), and appropriate critical view of safety (CVS) identification), which were all assigned positive values. Minor or major intraoperative injuries to the biliary tract, development of postoperative complications related to biliary injuries, and mortality were assigned negative values. Conclusions: This is the first scoring system on the learning curve of LC based on variables selected through the experts' opinions. Although the score needs to be validated through future studies, it could be a useful tool to assess its efficacy within educational programs and surgical courses.

Robotic Revision of Hepaticojejunostomy for Benign Biliary Stricture.

Surgical revision of biliary enteric anastomoses (BEA) can be a challenging undertaking and a robotic platform may provide advantages that address many of the technical obstacles. We present our technical approach and outcomes for patients undergoing robotic revision of BEA for benign strictures. A retrospective review was performed for robot-assisted benign BEA revision at our institution. Operative details, perioperative metrics, and outcomes are reported. Four patients underwent anastomotic revision following previously failed non-operative management. There were no intraoperative complications, mean length of stay was 4-days, and all patients experienced resolution of presenting clinical signs and symptoms. No patients required reoperation and there was no mortality. Postoperative outcomes were consistent with findings reported for other interventional modalities. Based on our experience we conclude robotic intervention in this context is safe and improves the technical feasibility of this complex procedure.

Robotic Resection of Gallbladder Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Comparative Study to Open Resection.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery is gaining support for resection of gallbladder cancer (GBC). This study aims to compare operative and early outcomes of robotic resection (RR) to open resection (OR) from a single institution performing a high volume of robotic HPB surgery. METHODS: Twenty patients with GBC underwent RR from January 2013 to August 2019. Outcomes were compared to a historical control of 23 patients with OR. Radical cholecystectomy for suspected GBC and completion operations for incidental GBC after routine cholecystectomy were both included. RESULTS: Robotic resection had lower blood loss compared to OR (150 vs 350 mL, P = .002) and shorter postoperative length of stay (2.5 vs 6 days, P < .001), while median operative time was similar (193 vs 208 min, P = .604). There were no statistical differences in 30-day major complications or readmissions. No 30-day mortalities occurred. There was no statistical difference in survival trend (P = .438) or median lymph node harvest (5 vs 3, P = .189) for RR compared to OR. CONCLUSION: Robotic resection of GBC is safe and efficient, with lower length of hospital stay and blood loss compared to OR. Technical benefits of robotic-assisted surgery may prove advantageous though larger studies are still needed.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery® in Octogenarians Undergoing Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery.

Advances in perioperative care have increased the frequency of surgical intervention performed on the very elderly (≥80 years). This study aims to investigate the impact of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) on outcomes for octogenarians after major hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgery. Patients ≥80 years old in a single HPB ERAS program (September 2015-July 2018) were prospectively tracked in the ERAS Interactive Audit System (EIAS). Postoperative length of stay (LOS) as well as 30-day major complications, readmissions, and mortality were compared to a pre-ERAS octogenarian control. Since ERAS implementation, octogenarians comprised 7.3% (27 of 370) of patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (n=17), distal pancreatectomy (n=7), or hepatectomy (n=3). Thirty-day readmissions decreased after ERAS implementation (50% to 15%, P=.037). Thirty-day major complications, mortality, and LOS were similar with 64% median protocol compliance. ERAS for octogenarians in HPB surgery is safe and may contribute to more sustainable recovery resulting in reduced readmissions.