Abstract
Background
Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a complex operation with high perioperative morbidity and mortality, even in the highest volume centers. Since the development of the robotic platform, the number of reports on robotic-assisted pancreatic surgery has been on the rise. This article reviews the current state of completely robotic PD.
Materials and Methods
A systematic literature search was performed including studies published between January 2000 and July 2016 reporting PDs in which all procedural steps (dissection, resection and reconstruction) were performed robotically.
Results
Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria, including a total of 738 patients. Data regarding perioperative outcomes such as operative time, blood loss, mortality, morbidity, conversion and oncologic outcomes were analyzed. No major differences were observed in mortality, morbidity and oncologic parameters, between robotic and non-robotic approaches. However, operative time was longer in robotic PD, whereas the estimated blood loss was lower. The conversion rate to laparotomy was 6.5–7.8%.
Conclusions
Robotic PD is feasible and safe in high-volume institutions, where surgeons are experienced and medical staff are appropriately trained. Randomized controlled trials are required to further investigate outcomes of robotic PD. Additionally, cost analysis and data on long-term oncologic outcomes are needed to evaluate cost-effectiveness of the robotic approach in comparison with the open technique.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Murray T, Xu J, Smigal C, Thun MJ (2006) Cancer statistics, 2006. CA Cancer J Clin 56:106–130
Sarr MG, Murr M, Smyrk TC, Yeo CY, Fernandez del Castillo C, Hawes RH (2003) Primary cystic neoplasms of the pancreas. Neoplastic disorders of emerging importance-current state of the art and unanswered questions. J Gastrointest Surg 7:417–428
Schnelldorfer T, Adams DB, Warshaw AL, Lillemoe KD, Sarr MG (2008) Forgotten pioneers of pancreatic surgery: beyond the favorite few. Ann Surg 247:191–202
Whipple AO, Parsons WB, Mullins CR (1935) Treatment of carcinoma of the ampulla of Vater. Ann Surg 102:763–779
Papalampros A, Niehaus K, Moris D, Fard-Aghaie M, Stavrou G, Margonis AG, Angelou A, Oldhafer K (2016) A safe and feasible “clock-face” duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy with a very low incidence of anastomotic failure: a single center experience of 248 patients. J Visc Surg. doi:10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2016.05.004
Moris D, Papalampros A, Vailas M, Petrou A, Kontos M, Felekouras E (2016) The hepaticojejunostomy technique with intra-anastomotic stent in biliary diseases and its evolution throughout the years: a technical analysis. Gastroenterol Res Pract. doi:10.1155/2016/3692096
Winter JM, Cameron JL, Campbell KA, Arnold MA, Chang DC, Coleman J, Hodgin MB, Sauter PK, Hruban RH, Riall TS, Schulick RD, Choti MA, Lillemoe KD, Yeo CJ (2006) 1423 pancreaticoduodenectomies for pancreatic cancer: a single institution experience. J Gastrointest Surg 10:1199–1210
Gagner M, Pomp A (1994) Laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc 8:408–410
Mabrut JY, Fernandez-Cruz L, Azagra JS, Bassi C, Delvaux G, Weerts J, Fabre JM, Boulez J, Baulieux J, Peix JL, Gigot JF, Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Section (HBPS) of the Royal Belgian Society of Surgery, Belgian Group for Endoscopic Surgery (BGES), Club Coelio (2005) Laparoscopic pancreatic resection: results of a multicenter European study of 127 patients. Surgery 137:597–605
Boggi U, Amorese G, Vistoli F, Caniglia F, De Lio N, Perrone V, Barbarello L, Belluomini M, Signori S, Mosca F (2015) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic literature review. Surg Endosc 29:9–23
Bodner J, Augustin F, Wykypiel H, Fish J, Muehlmann G, Wetscher G, Schmid T (2005) The da Vinci robotic system for general surgical applications: a critical interim appraisal. Swiss Med Wkly 135:674–678
Velasquez CA, Navkar NV, Alsaied A, Balakrishnan S, Abinahed J, Al-Ansari AA, Jong Yoon W (2016) Preliminary design of an actuated imaging probe for generation of additional visual cues in a robotic surgery. Surg Endosc 30:2641–2648
Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PloS Med 6:e1000100
Wells GA, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M, Tugwell P. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality if nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Dept of Epidemiology and Community Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa
Oremus M, Wolfson C, Perrault A, Demers L, Momoli F, Moride Y (2001) Interrater reliability of the modified Jadad quality scale for systematic reviews of Alzheimer’s disease drug trials. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 12:232–236
Giulianotti PC, Sbrana F, Bianco FM, Elli EF, Shah G, Addeo P, Caravaglios G, Coratti A (2010) Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: single-surgeon experience. Surg Endosc 24:1646–1657
Lai EC, Yang GP, Tang CN (2012) Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy—a comparative study. Int J Surg 10:475–479
Zhou NX, Chen JZ, Liu Q, Zhang X, Wang Z, Ren S, Chen XF (2011) Outcomes of pancreatoduodenectomy with robotic surgery versus open surgery. Int J Med Robot 7:131–137
Horiguchi A, Uyama I, Ito M, Ishihara S, Asano Y, Yamamoto T, Ishida Y, Miyakawa S (2011) Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic surgery. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 18:488–492
de Vasconcellos Macedo AL, Schraibman V, Okazaki S, Mauro FC, Epstein MG, Goldman SM, Lustosa SA, Matos D (2011) Treatment of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms, neuroendocrine and periampullary pancreatic tumors using robotic surgery: a safe and feasible technique. J Robot Surg 5:35–41
Baker EH, Ross SW, Seshadri R, Swan RZ, Iannitti DA, Vrochides D, Martinie JB (2015) Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: role in 2014 and beyond. J Gastrointest Oncol 6:396–405
Chen S, Chen JZ, Zhan Q, Deng XX, Shen BY, Peng CH, Li HW (2015) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a prospective, matched, mid-term follow-up study. Surg Endosc 29:3698–3711
Cunningham KE, Zenati MS, Petrie JR, Steve JL, Hogg ME, Zeh HJ 3rd, Zureikat AH (2016) A policy of omitting an intensive care unit stay after robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy is safe and cost-effective. J Surg Res 204:8–14
Polanco PM, Zenati MS, Hogg ME, Shakir M, Boone BA, Bartlett DL, Zeh HJ, Zureikat AH (2016) An analysis of risk factors for pancreatic fistula after robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: outcomes from a consecutive series of standardized pancreatic reconstructions. Surg Endosc 30:1523–1529
Boggi U, Napoli N, Costa F, Kauffmann EF, Menonna F, Iacopi S, Vistoli F, Amorese G (2016) Robotic-assisted pancreatic resections. World J Surg. doi:10.1007/s00268-016-3565-3
Rashid OM, Mullinax JE, Pimiento JM, Meredith KL, Malafa MP (2015) Robotic Whipple procedure for pancreatic cancer: the Moffitt cancer center pathway. Cancer Control 22:340–351
Boone BA, Zenati M, Hogg ME, Steve J, Moser AJ, Bartlett DL, Zeh HJ, Zureikat AH (2015) Assessment of quality outcome for robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy; Identification of the learning curve. JAMA Surg 150:416–422
MacKenzie S, Kosari K, Sielaff T, Johnson E (2011) The robotic Whipple: operative strategy and technical considerations. J Robot Surg 5:3–9
Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G, Fingerhut A, Yeo C, Izbicki J, Neoptolemos J, Sarr M, Traverso W, Buchler M, International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula Definition (2005) Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery 138:8–13
Wente MN, Bassi C, Dervenis C, Fingerhut A, Gouma DJ, Izbicki JR, Neoptolemos JP, Padbury RT, Sarr MG, Traverso LW, Yeo CJ, Büchler MW (2007) Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Surgery 142:761–768
Giulianotti P, Gorodner V, Kinzer K, Benedetti E, Oberholzer J (2012) Robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy with preservation of the vascular supply for autologous islet cell isolation and transplantation: a case report. J Med Case Rep 6:74
Giulianotti PC, Coratti A, Angelini M, Sbrana F, Cecconi S, Balestracci T, Caravaglios G (2003) Robotics in general surgery: personal experience in a large community hospital. Arch Surg 138:777–784
Chalikonda S, Aguilar-Saavedra JR, Walsh RM (2012) Laparoscopic robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy: a case-matched comparison with open resection. Surg Endosc 26:2397–2402
Zureikat AH, Moser AJ, Boone BA, Bartlett DL, Zenati M, Zeh HJ 3rd (2013) 250 robotic pancreatic resections: safety and feasibility. Ann Surg 258:554–559
Buchs NC, Addeo P, Bianco FM, Ayloo S, Benedetti E, Giulianotti PC (2011) Robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. World J Surg 35:2739–2746
Zeh HJ, Zureikat AH, Secrest A, Dauoudi M, Bartlett D, Moser AJ (2012) Outcomes after robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary lesions. Ann Surg Oncol 19:864–870
Zeh HJ, Bartlett DL, Moser AJ (2011) Robotic-assisted major pancreatic resection. Adv Surg 45:323–340
Boggi U, Signori S, De Lio N, Perrone VG, Vistoli F, Belluomini M, Cappelli C, Amorese G, Mosca F (2013) Feasibility of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 100:917–925
Chan OC, Tang CN, Lai EC, Yang GP, Li MK (2011) Robotic hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a cohort study. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 18:471–480
Bao PQ, Mazirka PO, Watkins KT (2014) Retrospective comparison of robotic-assisted minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary neoplasms. J Gastrointest Surg 18:682–689
Wang M, Cai H, Meng L, Cai Y, Wang X, Li Y, Peng B (2016) Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy: a comprehensive review. Int J Surg 35:139–146
Correa-Gallego C, Dinkelspiel HE, Sulimanoff I, Fisher S, Viñuela EF, Kingham TP, Fong Y, DeMatteo RP, D’Angelica MI, Jarnagin WR, Allen PJ (2014) Minimally-invasive vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Surg 218:129–139
Briggs CD, Mann CD, Irving GR, Neal CP, Peterson M, Cameron IC, Berry DP (2009) Systematic review of minimally invasive pancreatic resection. J Gastrointest Surg 13:1129–1137
Addeo P, Guilianotti PC (2010) Update on laparoscopic pancreatectomy in 2010. Minerva Chir 65:655–666
Buchs NC, Volonte F, Pugin F, Bucher P, Jung M, Morel P (2010) Robotic pancreatic resection: how far can we go? Minerva Chir 66:603–614
Fernández-del Castillo C, Morales-Oyarvide V, McGrath D, Wargo JA, Ferrone CR, Thayer SP, Lillemoe KD, Warshaw AL (2012) Evolution of the Whipple procedure at the Massachusetts General Hospital. Surgery 152:S56–S63
Denbo JW, Orr WS, Zarzaur BL, Behrman SW (2012) Toward defining grade C pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy: incidence, risk factors, management and outcome. HPB (Oxford) 14:589–593
Braga M, Capretti G, Pecorelli N et al (2011) A prognostic score to predict major complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 254(5):702–707 (discussion 707–708)
Callery MP, Pratt WB, Kent TS, Chaikof EL, Vollmer CM Jr (2013) A prospectively validated clinical risk score accurately predicts pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg 216(1):1–14
Birkmeyer JD, Warshaw AL, Finlayson SR, Grove MR, Tosteson AN (1999) Relationship between hospital volume and late survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surgery 126:178–183
Yeo CJ, Cameron JL (1999) Improving results of pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer. World J Surg 23:907–912
Goldfarb M, Goldfarb M, Brower S, Schwaitzberg SD (2010) Minimally invasive surgery and cancer: controversies part 1. Surg Endosc 24:304–334
Moris D, Felekouras E, Chrousos GP (2016) No cytokine is an island: IL-6 alone is not sufficient to predict morbidity after a major abdominal surgery. Ann Surg. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001977
Barbash GI, Glied SA (2010) New technology and health care costs—the case of robot-assisted surgery. N Engl J Med 363:701–704
Baker EH, Ross SW, Seshadri R, Swan RZ, Iannitti DA, Vrochides D, Martinie JB (2016) Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: comparison of complications and cost to the open approach. Int J Med Robot 12:554–560
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Author contributions
MK, MV, AP contributed to study concept and design. MK, DM, DS helped with acquisition of data. MK, DM, AP, AM contributed to analysis and interpretation of data. DM, EF, AP helped in drafting of the manuscript. DM, AMitrousias, AMichalinos, EF contributed to critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content. EWB helped in editing and Linguistic control. MK, DM contributed to statistical analysis. MV helped with administrative, technical or material support. EWB, MCM helped with revision. AP contributed to supervision.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Disclosures
Drs. Michail Kornaropoulos, Demetrios Moris, Eliza W. Beal, Marinos C. Makris, Apostolos Mitrousias, Athanasios Petrou, Evangelos Felekouras, Adamantios Michalinos, Michail Vailas, Dimitrios Schizas and Alexandros Papalampros have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kornaropoulos, M., Moris, D., Beal, E.W. et al. Total robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review of the literature. Surg Endosc 31, 4382–4392 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5523-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5523-z