Pancreatic stump closure in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (DP) commonly utilizes staplers due to its simplicity; however, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains the most frequent complication. We have developed a novel stump closure technique using a transpancreatic mattress suture with a polyglycolic acid sheet (TP method) under robotic DP. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of the TP method.

This study included 145 cases of pure minimally invasive DP performed between February 2011 and July 2024: 34 robotic (R) and 97 laparoscopic (Lap). Surgical outcomes were compared across 3 groups based on the stump closure method: 18 cases using the TP method (TP group; R: 18), 22 with hand-sewn closure in a fish-mouth manner (FM group; Lap: 22), and 91 with a reinforced stapler (S group; R: 16, Lap: 75). Logistic regression analysis was employed to identify risk factors for POPF.

POPF occurred in 20 of 131 cases (grade B: 19, C: 1, 15.3%). The TP group exhibited the lowest POPF rate (TP vs FM vs S: 5.6% vs 27.3% vs 14.3%). Multivariate analysis identified pancreatic thickness ≥12 mm as an independent risk factor. For thickness <12 mm, no significant differences in POPF rates were observed (TP vs FM vs S: 0% vs 25.0% vs 5.6%). However, for thickness ≥12 mm, the TP group had a significantly lower POPF rate compared with the S group (TP vs FM vs S: 7.7% vs 28.6% vs 47.4%).

The TP method is superior to stapler closure in preventing POPF, especially in cases with pancreatic thickness of ≥12 mm.

The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) in improving perioperative aspects and postoperative complications in patients.

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library database systems for studies that compared RPD with laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD). Meta-analysis was performed for 24 relevant outcomes, including perioperative outcomes and postoperative complications. Subsequently, a subgroup analysis based on geographical regions was conducted to investigate the impact of regional differences on the perioperative outcomes of the RPD group and the LPD group.

This review found 19 studies with 12,731 individuals (3539 RPD and 9192 LPD). In comparison to LPD, RPD had lower rates of Conversion (OR = 0.58, P < 0.00001), Blood Transfusion (OR = 0.59, P = 0.02), Length of Stay (MD = - 0.54, P = 0.01), postoperative complications [Pneumonia (OR = 0.31, P < 0.0001), and Wound Disruption (OR = 0.26, P = 0.0007)], and more thorough lymph node harvesting (MD = 1.25, P = 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that Blood Transfusion (I2 = 55%, P = 0.02), Conversion (I2 = 30%, P < 0.00001), Length of Stay (I2 = 71%, P = 0.01), and Lymph Node Harvested (I2 = 87%, P = 0.001) were statistically significant. Interestingly, compared to China, other countries had lower rates of Conversion and more lymph nodes harvested for RPD surgery.

The benefits of RPD surgery over LPD surgery in terms of therapy and an optimistic short-term prognosis are clearly supported by this study. Moreover, subgroup analysis based on regional differences revealed statistically significant results for Conversion, Length of Stay (days), Number of Lymph Nodes Harvested and the rate of Blood Transfusion, indicating significant variability across regions. This study provides a solid theoretical foundation and basis for the advancement of RPD in clinical practice.

Minimally invasive surgery (MI) has become the standard of care for many surgical procedures aimed at reducing the burden on patients. However, its adoption in pancreatic surgery (PS) has been limited by the pancreas's unique location and the complexity of the dissection and reconstruction phases. These factors continue to contribute to PS having one of the highest morbidity and mortality rates in general surgery. Despite a rough start, MIPS has gained widespread acceptance in clinical practice recently. Robust evidence supports MI distal pancreatectomy safety, even in oncological cases, indicating its potential superiority over open surgery. However, definitive evidence of MI pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) feasibility and safety, particularly for malignant lesions, is still lacking. Nonetheless, reports from high-volume centers are emerging, suggesting outcomes comparable to those of the open approach. The robotic PS increasing adoption, facilitated by the wider availability of robotic platforms, may further facilitate the transition to MIPD by overcoming the technical constraints associated with laparoscopy and accelerating the learning curve. Although the MIPS implementation process cannot be stopped in this evolving world, ensuring patient safety through strict outcome monitoring is critical. Investing in younger surgeons with structured and recognized training programs can promote safe expansion.

Spleen preservation during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) should be pursued if safe and oncologically justified. The aim of the presented study was to compare surgical outcomes and identify risk factors for unplanned splenectomy during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and evaluate short and long-terms outcomes.

The following study is a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, with the intention of preserving the spleen, for benign tumors of the body and tail of the pancreas between August 2012 and December 2022. Follow-up for patients' survival was completed in January 2023. In all, 106 patients were in total included in this study. Median age was 58 (41 to 67) years. The study population included 29 males (27.4%) and 77 females (72.6%).

Spleen preservation was possible in 67 (63.2%) patients. The tumor size was larger in the splenectomy group (respectively, 30 (16.5 to 49) vs. 15 (11 to 25); P <0.001). Overall, serious postoperative morbidity was 13.4% in the LSPDP group and 20.5% in the second group ( P =0.494). There were no perioperative deaths. The postoperative pancreatic fistula rate was 18% in the splenectomy group and 14.9% in the LSPDP group, while B and C fistulas were diagnosed in 15.4% and 10.5% of patients, respectively. In the multivariate logistic regression model, tumor size >3 cm was found to independently increase odds for unplanned splenectomy (OR 8.41, 95%CI 2.89-24.46; standardized for BMI).

Unplanned splenectomy during the attempt of LSPDP does not increase the risk for postoperative morbidity and postoperative pancreatic fistula. The independent risk factor for unplanned splenectomy during LSPDP is tumor size above 3 cm.

To undertake a review of systematic reviews on the clinical outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery across a mix of intracavity procedures, using evidence mapping to inform the decision makers on the best utilisation of robotic-assisted surgery.

We included systematic reviews with randomised controlled trials and non-randomised controlled trials describing any clinical outcomes.

Ovid Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library from 2017 to 2023.

We first presented the number of systematic reviews distributed in different specialties. We then mapped the body of evidence across selected procedures and synthesised major findings of clinical outcomes. We used a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews to evaluate the quality of systematic reviews. The overlap of primary studies was managed by the corrected covered area method.

Our search identified 165 systematic reviews published addressing clinical evidence of robotic-assisted surgery. We found that for all outcomes except operative time, the evidence was largely positive or neutral for robotic-assisted surgery versus both open and laparoscopic alternatives. Evidence was more positive versus open. The evidence for the operative time was mostly negative. We found that most systematic reviews were of low quality due to a failure to deal with the inherent bias in observational evidence.

Robotic surgery has a strong clinical effectiveness evidence base to support the expanded use of robotic-assisted surgery in six common intracavity procedures, which may provide an opportunity to increase the proportion of minimally invasive surgeries. Given the high incremental cost of robotic-assisted surgery and longer operative time, future economic studies are required to determine the optimal use of robotic-assisted surgery capacity.

Central pancreatectomy is a surgical procedure for benign and low-grade malignant tumors which located in the neck and proximal body of the pancreas that facilitates the preservation of pancreatic endocrine and exocrine functions but has a high morbidity rate, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness between minimally invasive central pancreatectomy (MICP) and open central pancreatectomy (OCP) basing on perioperative outcomes.

An extensive literature search to compare MICP and OCP was conducted from October 2003 to October 2023 on PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Fixed-effect models or random effects were selected based on heterogeneity, and pooled odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

A total of 10 studies with a total of 510 patients were included. There was no significant difference in POPF between MICP and OCP (OR = 0.95; 95% CI [0.64, 1.43]; P = 0.82), whereas intraoperative blood loss (MD = - 125.13; 95% CI [- 194.77, -55.49]; P < 0.001) and length of hospital stay (MD = - 2.86; 95% CI [- 5.00, - 0.72]; P = 0.009) were in favor of MICP compared to OCP, and there was a strong trend toward a lower intraoperative transfusion rate in MICP than in OCP (MD = 0.34; 95% CI [0.11, 1.00]; P = 0.05). There was no significant difference in other outcomes between the two groups.

MICP was as safe and effective as OCP and had less intraoperative blood loss and a shorter length of hospital stay. However, further studies are needed to confirm the results.

Total pancreatectomy with islet autotransplantation (TPIAT) treats refractory pain in chronic pancreatitis, prevents episodes of acute exacerbation, and mitigates postoperative brittle diabetes. The minimally invasive (MIS) approach offers a decreased surgical access trauma and enhanced recovery. Having established a laparoscopic TPIAT program, we adopted a robotic approach (R-TPIAT) and studied patient outcomes compared to open TPIAT.

Between 2013 and 2021, 61 adult patients underwent TPIAT after a comprehensive evaluation (97% chronic pancreatitis). Pancreatic islets were isolated on-site during the procedure. We analyzed and compared intraoperative surgical and islet characteristics, postoperative morbidity and mortality, and 1-year glycemic outcomes.

MIS-TPIAT was performed in 41 patients (67%, 15 robotic and 26 laparoscopic), and was associated with a shorter mean length of intensive care unit stay compared to open TPIAT (2.9 vs 4.5 days, p = 0.002). R-TPIAT replaced laparoscopic TPIAT in 2017 as the MIS approach of choice and demonstrated decreased blood loss compared to open TPIAT (324 vs 843 mL, p = 0.004), similar operative time (609 vs 562 min), 30-day readmission rate (7% vs 15%), and 90-day complication rate (13% vs 20%). The glycemic outcomes including C-peptide detection at 1-year (73% vs 88%) and insulin dependence at 1-year (75% vs 92%) did not differ. The mean length of hospital stay after R-TPIAT was 8.6 days, shorter than for laparoscopic (11.5 days, p = 0.031) and open TPIAT (12.6 days, p = 0.017). Both MIS approaches had a 1-year mortality rate of 0%.

R-TPIAT was associated with a 33% reduction in length of hospital stay (4-day benefit) compared to open TPIAT. R-TPIAT was similar to open TPIAT on measures of feasibility, safety, pain control, and 1-year glycemic outcomes. Our data suggest that robotic technology, a new component in the multidisciplinary therapy of TPIAT, is poised to develop into the primary surgical approach for experienced pancreatic surgeons.

Robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) has emerged as a minimally invasive approach to left-sided pancreatic tumors. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the robot-assisted approach (RAA) using a laparoscopic articulating vessel-sealing device (LAVSD) during RDP by comparing it with the pure-robotic approach (PRA). Among 62 patients who underwent RDP between April 2020 and December 2023 at Fujita Health University, 22 underwent RAA (the RAA group). In RAA, console surgeons mainly prepared the surgical fields, and assistant surgeons actively dissected the adipose and connective tissues using LAVSD. The surgical outcomes of these patients were compared with those of 40 consecutive patients who underwent RDP with PRA. In total, 28 males and 34 females with a median age of 71 years were analyzed. The console surgeon's prior experience of performing RDP was similar between the groups (RAA; median, 6 [range, 0-36], PRA; median, 5.5 [range, 0-34] cases). The operation time was significantly shorter in the TST group (median, 300.5 [range, 202-557] vs. 363.5 [range, 230-556] min, p = 0.015). Major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ grade 3a) occurred less frequently in the RAA group (4.6% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.028). Although the median postoperative hospital stay was slightly shorter in the RAA group (median, 12 [range, 8-38] vs. 14.5 [8-44] days, p = 0.095), no statistically significant difference was observed. Compared with PRA, RAA using LAVSD is found to be safe and feasible in introducing RDP for operators with little experience.

International guidelines recommend monitoring the use and outcome of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS). However, data from prospective international audits on minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) are lacking. This study examined the use and outcome of robot-assisted (RDP) and laparoscopic (LDP) distal pancreatectomy in the E-MIPS registry.

Post-hoc analysis in a prospective audit on MIPS, including consecutive patients undergoing MIDP in 83 centers from 19 European countries (01-01-2019/31-12-2021). Primary outcomes included intraoperative events (grade 1: excessive blood loss, grade 2: conversion/change in operation, grade 3: intraoperative death), major morbidity, and in-hospital/30-day mortality. Multivariable logistic regression analyses identified high-risk groups for intraoperative events. RDP and LDP were compared in the total cohort and high-risk groups.

Overall, 1672 patients undergoing MIDP were included; 606 (36.2%) RDP and 1066 (63.8%) LDP. The annual use of RDP increased from 30.5% to 42.6% ( P <0.001). RDP was associated with fewer grade 2 intraoperative events compared with LDP (9.6% vs. 16.8%, P <0.001), with longer operating time (238 vs. 201 min, P <0.001). No significant differences were observed between RDP and LDP regarding major morbidity (23.4% vs. 25.9%, P =0.264) and in-hospital/30-day mortality (0.3% vs. 0.8%, P =0.344). Three high-risk groups were identified; BMI greater than 25 kg/m 2 , previous abdominal surgery, and vascular involvement. In each group, RDP was associated with fewer conversions and longer operative times.

This European registry-based study demonstrated favorable outcomes for MIDP, with mortality rates below 1%. LDP remains the predominant approach, whereas the use of RDP is increasing. RDP was associated with fewer conversions and longer operative time, including in high-risk subgroups. Future randomized trials should confirm these findings and assess cost differences.

Minimally invasive surgery is increasingly preferred for left-sided pancreatic resections. The SIMPLR study aims to compare open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches using propensity score matching analysis.

This study included 258 patients with tumors of the left side of the pancreas who underwent surgery between 2016 and 2020 at three high-volume centers. The patients were divided into three groups based on their surgical approach and matched in a 1:1 ratio.

The open group had significantly higher estimated blood loss (620 mL vs. 320 mL, p < 0.001), longer operative time (273 vs. 216 min, p = 0.003), and longer hospital stays (16.9 vs. 6.81 days, p < 0.001) compared to the laparoscopic group. There was no difference in lymph node yield or resection status. When comparing open and robotic groups, the robotic procedures yielded a higher number of lymph nodes (24.9 vs. 15.2, p = 0.011) without being significantly longer. The laparoscopic group had a shorter operative time (210 vs. 340 min, p < 0.001), shorter ICU stays (0.63 vs. 1.64 days, p < 0.001), and shorter hospital stays (6.61 vs. 11.8 days, p < 0.001) when compared to the robotic group. There was no difference in morbidity or mortality between the three techniques.

The laparoscopic approach exhibits short-term benefits. The three techniques are equivalent in terms of oncological safety, morbidity, and mortality.

Postoperative pancreatic fistulas (POPFs) are prevalent and major postoperative complications of distal pancreatectomy (DP). There are numerous ways to manage the pancreatic stump. However, no single approach has been shown to be consistently superior. Moreover, the potential role of robotic systems in reducing POPFs has received little attention.

The clinical data of 119 patients who had consecutively received robotic distal pancreatectomy between January 2019 and December 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the method of handling the pancreatic stump. The attributes of the patients and the variables during the perioperative period were compared.

The analysis included 72 manual sutures and 47 stapler procedures. The manual suture group had a shorter operative time (removing installation time) than the stapler group (125.25 ± 63.04 min vs 153.30 ± 62.03 min, p = 0.019). Additionally, the manual suture group had lower estimated blood loss (50 mL vs 100 mL, p = 0.009) and a shorter postoperative hospital stay. There were no significant differences in the incidence of clinically relevant POPFs between the two groups (18.1% vs 23.4%, P > 0.05). No perioperative death occurred in either group.

The manual suturing technique was shown to have an incidence of POPFs similar to the stapler technique in robotic distal pancreatectomy and to be safe and feasible.

The primary treatment for pancreatic cancer is surgical resection, and laparoscopic resection offers benefits over open surgery. This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted vs. conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.

Data of adults ≥ 20 years old with pancreatic cancer who underwent conventional laparoscopic or robot-assisted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy were extracted from the United States (US) Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2005-2018 database. Comorbidities and complications were identified through the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes. Short-term outcomes were compared using logistic regression and included length of hospital stay (LOS), perioperative complications, in-hospital mortality, unfavorable discharge, and total hospital costs.

A total of 886 patients were included; 27% received robot-assisted, and 73% received conventional laparoscopic surgery. The mean age of all patients was 65.3 years, and 52% were females. Multivariable analysis revealed that robot-assisted surgery was associated with a significantly reduced risk of perioperative complications (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.45-0.83) compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery. Specifically, robot-assisted surgery was associated with a significantly decreased risk of VTE (aOR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.14-0.83) and postoperative blood transfusion (aOR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.23-0.61). Robot-assisted surgery was associated with a significantly shorter LOS (0.76 days shorter, 95% CI: -1.43--0.09) but greater total hospital costs (18,284 USD greater, 95% CI: 4369.03-32,200.70) than conventional laparoscopic surgery.

Despite the higher costs, robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy is associated with decreased risk of complications and shorter hospital stays than conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.

Evidence on the value of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS) has been increasing but it is unclear how this has influenced the view of pancreatic surgeons on MIPS.

An anonymous survey was sent to members of eight international Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Associations. Outcomes were compared with the 2016 international survey.

Overall, 315 surgeons from 47 countries participated. The median volume of pancreatic resections per center was 70 (IQR 40-120). Most surgeons considered minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) superior to open (ODP) (94.6%) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) superior to minimally invasive (MIPD) (67.9%). Since 2016, there has been an increase in the number of surgeons performing both MIDP (79%-85.7%, p = 0.024) and MIPD (29%-45.7%, p < 0.001), and an increase in the use of the robot-assisted approach for both MIDP (16%-45.6%, p < 0.001) and MIPD (23%-47.9%, p < 0.001). The use of laparoscopy remained stable for MIDP (91% vs. 88.1%, p = 0.245) and decreased for MIPD (51%-36.8%, p = 0.024).

This survey showed considerable changes of MIPS since 2016 with most surgeons considering MIDP superior to ODP and an increased use of robot-assisted MIPS. Surgeons prefer OPD and therefore the value of MIPD remains to be determined in randomized trials.

Utilization of minimally-invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma has increased. While unplanned conversion to an open procedure during MIDP is associated with inferior short-term outcomes, the long-term consequences of conversion have not been adequately examined.

Patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma undergoing MIDP were selected from the National Cancer Database (2010-2015) and subdivided based on the occurrence of unplanned conversion. Post-operative outcomes and overall survival (OS) were examined. Conversion was additionally compared to a matched group of planned open resections.

Among 592 patients undergoing attempted MIDP, unplanned conversion occurred in 23.1%. Despite increased 90-day mortality among patients experiencing conversion, there was no difference in median OS between groups (25.0 vs 27.8 months, p = 0.095). For patients undergoing conversion, post-operative outcomes and long-term survival were similar when compared to a propensity-matched group of patients undergoing planned open resection. On multivariable analysis, treatment at an academic facility (OR 0.63) and a robotic approach (OR 0.50) were both significantly associated with completed MIDP.

Despite inferior post-operative outcomes compared to successful MIDP, unplanned conversion did not result in significantly reduced long term survival. MIDP can be attempted selectively but treatment at experienced centers via a robotic approach should be considered.

Robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) has a better or comparable surgical outcome when compared with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). However, whether the surgical outcome for these procedures in local, low-volume hospitals are comparable with those of the typically larger centers described in published reports remains unclear.

This study enrolled 48 patients who underwent either RDP or LDP between August 2012 and April 2023. Data were retrospectively analyzed to evaluate the short-term surgical outcomes of RDP versus LDP in our hospital, which is a low-volume center.

The use of stapling with reinforcement in RDP was significantly higher than in LDP, and the postoperative hospital stay for RDP was significantly shorter than for LDP. Except for these two variables, there were no statistically significant differences between RDP and LDP in preoperative, intraoperative, or postoperative patient characteristics.

RDP can be performed as safely and effectively as LDP in a low-volume hospital located in a sparsely populated area.

Pancreatic fistulas are highly feared complications following surgery on or near the pancreas, abdominal trauma, or severe inflammation. These fistulas arise from leaks in the pancreatic ductal system, leading to various complications such as abscesses, delayed gastric emptying, and hemorrhage. Severe cases present with sepsis or organ failure, dramatically increasing mortality and morbidity. Risk factors include smoking, high BMI, male gender, age, and surgery-related factors like prolonged operation time and non-ligation of the main pancreatic duct. Therefore, treatment options and preventive measurements have become a hot topic in recent years. Studies have investigated the use of fibrin sealants, different closure methods, and less invasive surgical techniques. Treatment options consist of conservative measurements and the use of percutaneous drainage, prophylactic transpapillary stenting, and surgery in severe cases. As EUS has become widely available, transmural stenting started to influence the management of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). However, studies on its use for the management of pancreatic fistulas are lacking. Medical treatment options like somatostatin analogs and pasireotide have been investigated but yielded mixed results.