Zur Hauptnavigation wechseln Zur Suche wechseln Zum Hauptinhalt wechseln

Abstract

Background: The use of robot-assisted and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy is increasing, yet large adjusted analyses that can be generalized internationally are lacking. This study aimed to compare outcomes after robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy in a pan-European cohort. Methods: An international multicenter retrospective study including patients after robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy from 50 centers in 12 European countries (2009–2020). Propensity score matching was performed in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was major morbidity (Clavien–Dindo ≥III). Results: Among 2,082 patients undergoing minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy, 1,006 underwent robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and 1,076 laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy. After matching 812 versus 812 patients, the rates of major morbidity (31.9% vs 29.6%; P = .347) and 30-day/in-hospital mortality (4.3% vs 4.6%; P = .904) did not differ significantly between robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy, respectively. Robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with a lower conversion rate (6.7% vs 18.0%; P < .001) and higher lymph node retrieval (16 vs 14; P = .003). Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with shorter operation time (446 minutes versus 400 minutes; P < .001), and lower rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B/C (19.0% vs 11.7%; P < .001), delayed gastric emptying grade B/C (21.4% vs 7.4%; P < .001), and a higher R0-resection rate (73.2% vs 84.4%; P < .001). Conclusion: This European multicenter study found no differences in overall major morbidity and 30-day/in-hospital mortality after robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy compared with laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy. Further, laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with a lower rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, wound infection, shorter length of stay, and a higher R0 resection rate than robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy. In contrast, robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with a lower conversion rate and a higher number of retrieved lymph nodes as compared with laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy.

OriginalspracheEnglisch
ZeitschriftSurgery (United States)
Jahrgang175
Ausgabenummer6
Seiten (von - bis)1587-1594
Seitenumfang8
ISSN0039-6060
DOIs
PublikationsstatusVeröffentlicht - 06.2024

Fördermittel

The authors would like to acknowledge the E-MIPS consortium for enabling this study. COLLABORATORS Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia: Alberto Manzoni, Martina Guerra; Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam: Freek Daams, Geert Kazemier; Moscow Clinical Scientific Center, Moscow, Russia: Roman Izrailov, Mikhail Efanov; University of Pisa, Pisa: Niccolò Napoli, Michael Ginesini; Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam: Marie Cappelle, Roel Haen; Center Hospitalier Universitaire Orleans: Romain Quetel, Marco Pucci; St. Antonius Hospital and University Medical Center, Utrecht: Wouter. Derksen, Jeroen Hagendoorn. Beaujon: Fadhel Samir Ftériche, Milena Muzzolini; Groeninge Hospital Kortrijk: Franky Vansteenkiste; University of Schleswig-Holstein Campus Lübeck: Louisa Bolm, Maike ten Winkel; ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda: Alessandro Giani, Pietro Calcagno

UN SDGs

Dieser Output leistet einen Beitrag zu folgendem(n) Ziel(en) für nachhaltige Entwicklung

  1. SDG 3 – Gesundheit und Wohlergehen
    SDG 3 – Gesundheit und Wohlergehen

Strategische Forschungsbereiche und Zentren

  • Forschungsschwerpunkt: Biomedizintechnik

DFG-Fachsystematik

  • 2.22-25 Allgemein- und Viszeralchirurgie
  • 4.41-01 Automatisierungstechnik, Mechatronik, Regelungssysteme Intelligente Technische Systeme, Robotik

Fingerprint

Untersuchen Sie die Forschungsthemen von „Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy: a pan-European multicenter propensity-matched study“. Zusammen bilden sie einen einzigartigen Fingerprint.

Zitieren