Comparing oncologic and surgical outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a propensity-matched analysis

被引:1
|
作者
Chang, Jenny H. [1 ]
Wehrle, Chase [1 ]
Woo, Kimberly [1 ]
Naples, Robert [1 ]
Stackhouse, Kathryn A. [1 ]
Dahdaleh, Fadi [2 ]
Joyce, Daniel [1 ]
Simon, Robert [1 ]
Augustin, Toms [1 ]
Walsh, R. Matthew [1 ]
Naffouje, Samer A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Cleveland Clin Fdn, Dept Gen Surg, 18101 Lorain Ave, Cleveland, OH 44111 USA
[2] Edward Elmhurst Hosp, Dept Surg Oncol, Elmhurst, IL USA
关键词
Robotic distal pancreatectomy; Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy; National cancer database; LYMPH-NODE RATIO; SURVIVAL; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1007/s00464-024-11147-5
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundThe frequency of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is gradually exceeding that of the open approach. Our study aims to compare short-term outcomes of robotic (RDP) and laparoscopic (LDP) distal pancreatectomies for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) using a national database.MethodsThe National Cancer Database was utilized to identify patients with PDAC who underwent distal pancreatectomy from 2010-2020. Short-term technical and oncologic outcomes such as margin status and nodal harvest were included. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was performed comparing LDP and RDP cohorts. Multivariate logistic-regression models were then used to assess the impact of institutional volume on the MIDP surgical and technical oncologic outcomes.Results1537 patients underwent MIDP with curative intent. Most cases were laparoscopic (74.4%, n = 1144), with a gradual increase in robotic utilization, from 8.7% in 2010 to 32.0% of MIDP cases ten years later. For PSM, 698 LDP patients were matched with 349 RDP. The odds of conversion to an open case were 58% less in RDP (12.6%) compared to LDP (25.5%) with no statistically significant difference in technical oncologic results. There was no difference in length of stay (OR = 1.0[0.7-1.4]), 30-day mortality (OR = 0.5[0.2-2.0]) or 90-day mortality (OR = 1.1[0.5-2.4]) between RDP and LDP, although there was a higher 30-day readmission rate with RDP (OR = 1.71[1.1-2.7]). There were statistically significant differences in technical oncologic outcomes (nodal harvest, margin status, initiation of adjuvant therapy) based on MIDP volume quartiles.ConclusionLaparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy have similar peri- and post-operative surgical and oncologic outcomes, with a higher rate of conversion to open in the laparoscopic cohort.
引用
收藏
页码:5678 / 5685
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: multicentre analysis
    Lof, S.
    van der Heijde, N.
    Abuawwad, M.
    Al-Sarireh, B.
    Boggi, U.
    Butturini, G.
    Capretti, G.
    Coratti, A.
    Casadei, R.
    D'Hondt, M.
    Esposito, A.
    Ferrari, G.
    Fusai, G.
    Giardino, A.
    Koerkamp, B. Groot
    Hackert, T.
    Kamarajah, S.
    Kauffmann, E. F.
    Keck, T.
    Marudanayagam, R.
    Nickel, F.
    Manzoni, A.
    Pessaux, P.
    Pietrabissa, A.
    Rosso, E.
    Salvia, R.
    Soonawalla, Z.
    White, S.
    Zerbi, A.
    Besselink, M. G.
    Abu Hilal, M.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2021, 108 (02) : 188 - 195
  • [42] Open versus laparoscopic versus robotic inguinal hernia repair: A propensity-matched outcome analysis
    Lorenz, William R.
    Holland, Alexis M.
    Adams, Alexandrea S.
    Mead, Brittany S.
    Scarola, Gregory T.
    Kercher, Kent W.
    Augenstein, Vedra A.
    Heniford, B. Todd
    SURGERY, 2025, 179
  • [43] Liver resection in stage 0-A HCC in segments 7/8: a propensity-matched analysis comparing open, laparoscopic, and robotic approach
    Wang, Yunchuan
    Lu, Shiliu
    Tan, Xuelin
    Xie, Shengjie
    Liang, Guozhi
    Liang, Haifeng
    Guo, Jixu
    Yuan, Guandou
    Yu, Shuiping
    He, Songqing
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2025, 39 (03): : 1902 - 1914
  • [44] Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: analysis of trends in surgical techniques, patient selection, and outcomes
    Giuseppe Malleo
    Isacco Damoli
    Giovanni Marchegiani
    Alessandro Esposito
    Tiziana Marchese
    Roberto Salvia
    Claudio Bassi
    Giovanni Butturini
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2015, 29 : 1952 - 1962
  • [45] Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: analysis of trends in surgical techniques, patient selection, and outcomes
    Malleo, Giuseppe
    Damoli, Isacco
    Marchegiani, Giovanni
    Esposito, Alessandro
    Marchese, Tiziana
    Salvia, Roberto
    Bassi, Claudio
    Butturini, Giovanni
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2015, 29 (07): : 1952 - 1962
  • [46] Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: A comparative study of clinical outcomes and costs analysis
    Ielpo, Benedetto
    Duran, Hipolito
    Diaz, Eduardo
    Fabra, Isabel
    Caruso, Riccardo
    Malave, Luis
    Ferri, Valentina
    Nunez, J.
    Ruiz-Ocana, A.
    Jorge, E.
    Lazzaro, Sara
    Kalivaci, Denis
    Quijano, Yolanda
    Vicente, Emilio
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2017, 48 : 300 - 304
  • [47] ROBOTIC VERSUS LAPAROSCOPIC DISTAL PANCREATECTOMY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF CLINICAL OUTCOMES AND COSTS ANALYSIS
    Nunez Alfonsel, J.
    Ielpo, B.
    Quijano, Y.
    Vicente, E.
    Hidalgo, A.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2018, 21 : S46 - S47
  • [48] A comprehensive analysis of robotic assisted vs. laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy using propensity score matching
    Xu, Wan-Yu
    Xin, Jiang
    Yang, Young
    Wang, Qian-Wen
    Yuan, Bei-Hai
    Peng, Fang-Xing
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2025, 19 (01)
  • [49] Comparison of perioperative and oncologic outcomes after open, laparoscopic, and robotic distal pancreatectomy: a single-center retrospective study
    Enliang Zhou
    Xiaohui Li
    Chongyu Zhao
    Bokang Cui
    Updates in Surgery, 2024, 76 : 471 - 478
  • [50] Comparison of perioperative and oncologic outcomes after open, laparoscopic, and robotic distal pancreatectomy: a single-center retrospective study
    Zhou, Enliang
    Li, Xiaohui
    Zhao, Chongyu
    Cui, Bokang
    UPDATES IN SURGERY, 2024, 76 (02) : 471 - 478