Total laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: which one is better?
Background Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) is a challenging procedure. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is feasible and safe. Since the development of robotic platforms, the number of reports on robot-assisted pancreatic surgery has increased. We compared the technical fe...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Surgical endoscopy 2022-12, Vol.36 (12), p.8959-8966 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background
Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) is a challenging procedure. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is feasible and safe. Since the development of robotic platforms, the number of reports on robot-assisted pancreatic surgery has increased. We compared the technical feasibility and safety between LPD and robot-assisted LPD (RALPD).
Methods
From September 2012 to August 2020, 257 patients who underwent MIPD for periampullary tumors were enrolled. Of these, 207 underwent LPD and 50 underwent RALPD. We performed a 1:1 propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis and retrospectively analyzed the demographics and surgical outcomes.
Results
After PSM analysis, no difference was noted in demographics. Operation times and estimated blood loss were similar, as was the incidence of complications (
p
> 0.05). In subgroup analysis in patients with soft pancreas with pancreatic duct ≤ 2 mm, no significant between-group difference was noted regarding short-term surgical outcomes, including clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF) (
p
> 0.05). In multivariable analysis, the only soft pancreatic texture was a predictive factor (HR 3.887, 95% confidence interval 1.121–13.480,
p
= 0.032).
Conclusion
RALPD and LPD are safe and effective for MIPD and can compensate each other to achieve the goal of minimally invasive surgery. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0930-2794 1432-2218 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s00464-022-09347-y |