ASO Author Reflections: The Role of Robotic Surgery on Central Pancreatectomy.

Central pancreatectomy (CP) is indicated for benign or low-grade pancreatic tumors located in the neck or proximal pancreatic body. This procedure is demanding and has a high rate of postoperative complications. Minimally invasive surgery is now commonly used for CP but it is still unclear whether the robotic approach offers any advantages over conventional pancreatic minimally invasive surgery. Most studies on robotic CP are limited to case reports or case series; however, there are two important studies on this topic. Currently, the evidence on robotic CP remains limited, making it challenging to draw definitive conclusions in favor of one technique over the other. The use of a robotic platform, with its integrated tools such as intraoperative ultrasound, can guide the surgeon in performing this technically demanding procedure in a safer manner. The controversy regarding the best minimally invasive surgery approach for CP is still ongoing and requires further research.

Robotic Ultrasound-Guided Central Pancreatectomy with Main Pancreatic Duct Endoscopy Evaluation for High-Risk, Mixed-Type Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasm.

BACKGROUND: Central pancreatectomy (CP) is a parenchymal-sparing technique indicated for the resection of selected lesions of the neck or proximal body of the pancreas.1,2 The risk of postoperative complications is theoretically doubled because the surgeon has to manage two cut surfaces of the pancreas. The video shows a fully robotic CP to treat a 62-year-old male patient with a mixed-type intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) of the pancreatic neck, using ultrasound (US) and Wirsung endoscopic evaluation to guide the pancreatic resection and ensure optimal resection margins. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A US-guided robotic CP was carried out, and an intraoperative endoscopic evaluation of the MPD was performed to determine the distal transection level. A transmesocolic, end-to-side, robot-sewn Wirsung-jejunostomy with internal MPD stenting was then created. The procedure was completed with a side-to-side jejunojejunostomy. RESULTS: The operative time was 290 min, with negligible blood loss. During the postoperative course, the patient experienced bleeding from a branch of the gastroduodenal artery with subsequent fluid collection, which was successfully treated with angioembolization and percutaneous drainage. He was discharged home on postoperative day 22. Final pathology revealed a non-invasive IPMN with low-grade dysplasia and free surgical margins. At 12 months of follow-up, the patient was doing well, with no evidence of local recurrence and endocrine or exocrine pancreatic insufficiency. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of robotic surgery with intraoperative US and Wirsungoscopy may offer distinct technical advantages for challenging pancreatectomies that follow the principles of parenchymal-sparing surgery.

Fully Robotic Side-to-Side Linear-Stapled Anastomosis During Robotic Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: The adoption of robotic surgery for esophageal cancer has been expanding rapidly over the recent years. In the setting of two-field esophagectomy, different techniques exist for intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis, although the superiority of one over another has not been clearly demonstrated. Potential benefits in terms of anastomotic leakage and stenosis have been reported in association with a linear-stapled anastomosis as compared to the more widespread techniques of circular mechanical and hand-sewn reconstructions, however, there is still limited reported evidence on its application to robotic surgery. We here report our fully robotic technique of side-to-side, semi-mechanical anastomosis. METHODS: All consecutive patients undergoing fully robotic esophagectomy featuring intrathoracic side-to-side stapled anastomosis by a single surgical team were included in this analysis. Operative technique is detailed, and perioperative data are assessed. RESULTS: A total of 49 patients were included. There were no intraoperative complications and no conversion occurred. The rate of overall postoperative morbidity was 25, 14% being the relative rate of major complications. With anastomotic-related morbidity in particular, one patient developed minor anastomotic leakage. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience demonstrates that a linear, side-to-side fully robotic stapled anastomosis can be created with a high technical success and minimal incidence of anastomosis-related morbidity.

Robotic versus laparoscopic left colectomy: a propensity score matched analysis from a bi-centric experience.

The advantages of using the robotic platform may not be clearly evident in left colectomies, where the surgeon operates in an "open field" and does not routinely require intraoperative suturing. Current evidences are based on limited cohorts reporting conflicting outcomes regarding robotic left colectomies (RLC). The aim of this study is to report a bi-centric experience with robotic left colectomy in order to help in defining the role of the robotic approach for these procedures. This is a bi-centric propensity score matched study including patients who underwent RLC or laparoscopic left colectomy (LLC) between January 1, 2012 and May 1, 2022. RLC patients were matched to LLC patients in a 1:1 ratio. Main outcomes were conversion to open surgery and 30-day morbidity. In total, 300 patients were included. Of 143 (47.7%) RLC patients, 119 could be matched. After matching, conversion rate (4.2 vs. 7.6%, p = 0.265), 30-day morbidity (16.1 vs. 13.7%, p = 0.736), Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3 complications (2.4 vs 3.2%, p = 0.572), transfusions (0.8 vs. 4.0%, p = 0.219), and 30-day mortality (0.8 vs 0.8%, p = 1.000) were comparable for RLC and LLC, respectively. Median operative time was longer for RLC (296 min 260-340 vs. 245, 195-296, p < 0.0001). Early oral feeding, time to first flatus, and hospital stay were similar between groups. RLC has safety parameters as well as conversion to open surgery comparable with standard laparoscopy. Operative time is longer with the robotic approach.

Robotic esophagectomy: results from a tertiary care Italian center.

There is growing evidence supporting the use of minimally invasive resection in esophageal surgery, mainly due to reduced postoperative morbidity and faster recovery after surgery. In recent years, robot-assisted surgery has shown some potential benefits over conventional laparo-thoracoscopic esophagectomy. The purpose of this study is to report our experience with different esophageal resections with a full-robotic approach for malignant disease. All consecutive patients with resectable esophageal malignancy undergoing robotic esophagectomy over a 6-year time frame by a single surgical team were included in this analysis. Perioperative and clinicopathological outcomes were assessed. A total of 76 patients received robotic esophagectomy. Surgeries included 45 Lewis procedures, 25 McKeown procedures, and six transhiatal resections. There were no intraoperative complications and no conversions occurred. The rate of postoperative morbidity was 41%, while the rate of anastomotic leak was 13%. Overall, eight patients required reintervention. All patients received R0 resection, with a median of harvested lymph nodes of 35. 30-day and 90-day mortality was 3.9 and 7.9%, respectively. Our findings support the safety and oncological efficiency of full-robotic esophagectomy. All procedures of esophageal resection were associated with the expected perioperative morbidity while providing excellent pathological outcomes for patients with malignancy.

Robotic enucleation for oesophageal benign and borderline tumours: Less is more?

BACKGROUND: Oesophageal benign to borderline tumours are rare entities, and their optimal treatment strategy remains controversial. Surgical robotic enucleation is an option to optimize their management. METHODS: We prospectively collected data on seven consecutive oesophageal benign to borderline tumours operated robotically over a 4-year period. Patient baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes and medium-term follow-ups were reviewed and analysed retrospectively. RESULTS: Two patients underwent a robotic oesophagectomy and five underwent a simple enucleation. These last were the objective of the final analysis. Median operative time was 150 min. Neither deaths nor postoperative complications occurred. Median oral feeding started on postoperative day 3.5. The median postoperative stay was 5 days. Final histopathology confirmed two gastrointestinal stromal tumours, two leiomyomas and one simple cyst. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic enucleation of oesophageal benign to borderline tumours is a feasible procedure in a dedicated oesophageal unit, with optimal perioperative outcomes in a small series of cases with limited follow-up.

"Risk of tumor implantation in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in the upper aerodigestive tumors". Can the "non-pull" methods and the surgical approaches be definitively discarded?

.

Robotic Surgery of the Liver and Biliary Tract.

BACKGROUND: The laparoscopic methods for major abdominal surgery are gaining increasing acceptance worldwide. Despite its relatively recent introduction in clinical practice, robotics has been accepted as an effective option to perform high-demanding procedures such as those required in hepatobiliary surgery. Some potential advantages over conventional laparoscopy have been suggested, but its actual role in clinical practice is still to be defined. METHODS: The objective of this work is to critically review the available evidence on the application of robotic surgery to the liver and biliary tract. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library electronic databases were systematically searched for studies reporting on robotic hepatobiliary surgery with or without comparison with open surgery or conventional laparoscopy. RESULTS: This review provides a comprehensive snapshot of the current application of the robot to the surgery of the liver and biliary tract. The overall available data show the noninferiority of the robotic system to conventional open and laparoscopic surgery. A number of studies suggest some potential advantages in performing high-demanding procedures in a minimally invasive fashion. CONCLUSIONS: The robot can be used to perform various types of liver surgeries quite safely and competently, although the lack of randomized control trials, comparing it with open and laparoscopic surgery, precludes the possibility to reach definitive conclusions.

Early experience with totally robotic esophagectomy for malignancy. Surgical and oncological outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Over recent decades, minimally invasive esophagectomy has gained popularity and is increasingly performed worldwide. The aim of this work was to investigate the perioperative, clinicopathologic, and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted esophagectomy on a consecutive series of totally robotic procedures. METHODS: All patients received either an Ivor Lewis or a McKeown procedure according to tumor location. Perioperative, clinicopathologic and oncological outcomes were examined. RESULTS: A total of 38 patients underwent robot-assisted esophagectomy procedures. All underwent surgery for primary esophageal neoplasms. Neoadjuvant therapy was given to 22 patients. R0 resections were achieved in all patients and no conversion to open surgery occurred. Overall morbidity and mortality were 42% and 10%, respectively. The 1 year disease free survival was 78.9%, whereas the 1 year overall survival was 84.2%. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic surgery can be employed to treat esophageal malignancy competently. Robotic esophagectomy satisfies all features of pathologic appropriateness and offers the expected oncological results.

Robotic Rectal Resection With a Single-docking Technique Thanks to the Rotation of the R3 Arm.

BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery for rectal resection presents some advantages compared with the traditional technique; however, it also presents some limitations, especially due to the multiple changes of surgical fields. We describe a new technique to perform low-anterior resection using single docking with the rotation of the third arm and our perioperative results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 31 patients who underwent low-anterior rectal robotic resection with single-docking technique using robotic daVinci SI (Surgical Intuitive System) were included in the study. RESULTS: The mean operative time was 338 minutes. The conversion rate was 3%. The mean time of refeeding was 1.4 days and the mean time of hospital stay was 6 days. CONCLUSIONS: Our technique allowed to use the robot for all surgical steps with a single docking, thereby reducing the cost of the hybrid technique and facilitating the operative team in the management of the robotic cart.

Initial Experience With Robotic Pancreatic Surgery: Technical Feasibility and Oncological Implications.

Robotic surgery has been introduced in the field of minimally invasive surgery to improve the handling of high-demanding procedures with encouraging results. We aimed to evaluate the clinical safety and the oncological adequacy of robot-assisted pancreatic surgery by analyzing a consecutive series in terms of surgical and oncological outcomes. A total of 53 consecutive cases including 36 pancreatoduodenectomies (PD) and 14 distal pancreatectomies (DP) were evaluated. The overall postoperative morbidity and mortality were 32% and 3.8%, respectively. Radical resection was achieved in 93.7% of PD and 100% of DP, with a mean number of harvested lymph nodes of 29.8 for PD and 20.5 for DP. The 3-year cumulative overall survival was 44.2% and 73.9% for patient with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and nonductal malignancy, respectively. Robotic technology may be useful to reproduce conventional open pancreatic surgery with a minimally invasive approach, overcoming some of the intrinsic limitations of conventional laparoscopy.

Does robotics improve minimally invasive rectal surgery? Functional and oncological implications.

OBJECTIVE: Robot-assisted surgery has been reported to be a safe and effective alternative to conventional laparoscopy for the treatment of rectal cancer in a minimally invasive manner. Nevertheless, substantial data concerning functional outcomes and long-term oncological adequacy is still lacking. We aimed to assess the current role of robotics in rectal surgery focusing on patients' functional and oncological outcomes. METHODS: A comprehensive review was conducted to search articles published in English up to 11 September 2015 concerning functional and/or oncological outcomes of patients who received robot-assisted rectal surgery. All relevant papers were evaluated on functional implications such as postoperative sexual and urinary dysfunction and oncological outcomes. RESULTS: Robotics showed a general trend towards lower rates of sexual and urinary postoperative dysfunction and earlier recovery compared with laparoscopy. The rates of 3-year local recurrence, disease-free survival and overall survival of robotic-assisted rectal surgery compared favourably with those of laparoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: This study fails to provide solid evidence to draw definitive conclusions on whether robotic systems could be useful in ameliorating the outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer. However, the available data suggest potential advantages over conventional laparoscopy with reference to functional outcomes.

Robot-sewn Ivor-Lewis anastomosis: preliminary experience and technical details.

INTRODUCTION: Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy with intra-thoracic anastomosis showed encouraging results but there is a lack of data to demonstrate the safety and feasibility. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to report our experience in RA-ILE (robotic-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy) with robotic hand-sewn anastomosis. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of patients who underwent robotic-assisted esophagectomy in prone position with intrathoracic anastomosis for malignant neoplasm of the esophagus or esophago-gastric junction. RESULTS: From January 2012 to December 2014 we performed eight completely robot-assisted esophagectomy without intra-operative complication. The mortality rate at 30-day was zero. In two patients we observed a partial leakage of the gastric tube that required revision. The mean operative time was 499 ± 46 min including robotic set up and patient positioning. The median hospital-stay was 10 days. Complete (R0) resection was accomplished in all patients and the mean number of lymph nodes removed was 37.6 ± 14 .7. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary experience suggests that robotic-assisted RA-ILE for malignant lesions is a real surgical option compared with conventional surgery with satisfactory results. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Robotic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy: Technical considerations.

Laparoscopy has revolutionized the way of thinking abdominal surgery, however, to date there are still limitations making it difficult to apply this technique to some types of surgical procedures considered technically demanding even when performed by open surgery, such as the pancreaticoduodenectomy. This technical note provides a complete description of the surgical procedure performed for the execution of a robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy through the use of the "Da Vinci Si" robotic system. Robotic systems represent a real evolution in minimally invasive surgery. We wish to emphasize this concept, highlighting the application of this technology to complex procedures in digestive surgery.

Robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis compared with laparoscopic right colectomy with extracorporeal and intracorporeal anastomosis: a retrospective multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Growing evidence suggests that the intracorporeal fashioning of an anastomosis after a laparoscopic right colectomy may offer several advantages. However, due to the difficulty of the intracorporeal technique, laparoscopic extracorporeal confectioning of the anastomosis remains the most widely adopted technique. Although the purpose of the robotic approach was to overcome the limitations of the laparoscopic technique and to simplify the most demanding surgical procedures, such as performing an intracorporeal anastomosis, evidence is lacking that compares the robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis (RRCIA) technique with both the conventional laparoscopic right colectomy with extracorporeal anastomosis (LRCEA) and the laparoscopic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis confectioning (LRCIA) techniques. This study aims to compare the intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of the RRCIA to those of both the LRCEA and the LRCIA. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of two Italian centres was performed on the data on patients undergoing an RRCIA, LRCEA or LRCIA for cancer or adenomas. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty-six patients (RRCIA = 102, LRCEA = 94, LRCIA = 40) met the criteria for inclusion in the study. The three groups were comparable in their demographic and baseline characteristics. No significant differences were found in the conversion to open rates, intraoperative blood loss, 30-day morbidity and mortality, number of lymphnodes harvested and other pathological characteristics. Compared with the LRCEA, the RRCIA required a longer operative time (P < 0.0001) but had better recovery outcomes, such as a shorter length of hospital stay (P < 0.0001). Compared with the LRCIA, the RRCIA had a shorter time to first flatus (P < 0.0001) but offered no advantages in terms of the length of the hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Performing the RRCIA offers significantly better perioperative recovery outcomes compared with the LRCEA, with a substantial reduction in the length of the hospital stay. The RRCIA does not offer the same advantages compared with the LRCIA.

Robot-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer: current status and technical considerations.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted gastrectomy has been reported as a safe alternative to the conventional laparoscopy or open approach for treating early gastric carcinoma. To date, however, there are a limited number of published reports available in the literature. METHODS: We assess the current status of robotic surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer, focusing on the technical details and oncological considerations. RESULTS: In gastric surgery, the biggest advantage of robotic surgery is the ease and reproducibility of D2-lymphadenectomy. Reports show that even the intracorporeal digestive restoration is facilitated by use of the robotic approach, particularly following total gastrectomy. Additionally, the accuracy of robotic dissection is confirmed by decreased blood loss, as reported in series comparing robot-assisted with laparoscopic gastrectomy. The learning curve and technical reproducibility also appear to be shorter with robotic surgery and, consequently, robotics can help to standardize and diffuse minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer, even in the later stages. This is important because the application of minimally invasive surgery is limited by the complexity of performing a D2-lymphadenectomy. The potential to reproduce D2-lymphadenectomy, enlarged resections, and complex reconstructions provides robotic surgery with an important role in the therapeutic strategy of advanced gastric cancer. CONCLUSIONS: While published reports have shown no significant differences in surgical morbidity, mortality, or oncological adequacy between robot-assisted and conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy, more studies are needed to assess the indications and oncological effectiveness of robotic use in the treatment of gastric carcinoma. Herein, the authors assess the current status of robotic surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer, focusing on the technical details and oncological considerations.