First experience with robotic pancreatoduodenectomy in Singapore.

Tze-yi Low; Ye-xin Koh; Brian Kp Goh

Return

First experience with robotic pancreatoduodenectomy in Singapore.

Author: Tze-Yi LOW ¹ ; Ye-Xin KOH ¹ ; Brian Kp GOH ¹
Author Information

1. Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
Publication Type:Journal Article
Keywords: laparoscopic; minimally invasive surgery; pancreatectomy; pancreatoduodenectomy; robotic
From:Singapore medical journal 2020;61(11):598-604
CountrySingapore
Language:English
Abstract: INTRODUCTION:Recent studies reported that laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) is associated with superior perioperative outcomes compared to the open approach. However, concerns have been raised about the safety of LPD, especially during the learning phase. Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) has been reported to be associated with a shorter learning curve compared to LPD. We herein present our initial experience with RPD.
METHODS:A retrospective review of a single-institution prospective robotic hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) surgery database of 70 patients identified seven consecutive RPDs performed by a single surgeon in 2016-2017. These were matched at a 1:2 ratio with 14 open pancreatoduodenectomies (OPDs) selected from 77 consecutive pancreatoduodenectomies performed by the same surgeon between 2011 and 2017.
RESULTS:Seven patients underwent RPD, of which five were hybrid procedures with open reconstruction. There were no open conversions. Median operative time was 710.0 (range 560.0-930.0) minutes. Two major morbidities (> Grade 2) occurred: one gastrojejunostomy bleed requiring endoscopic haemostasis and one delayed gastric emptying requiring feeding tube placement. There were no pancreatic fistulas, reoperations or 90-day/in-hospital mortalities in the RPD group. Comparison between RPD and OPD demonstrated that RPD was associated with a significantly longer operative time. Compared to open surgery, there was no significant difference in estimated blood loss, blood transfusion, postoperative stay, pancreatic fistula rates, morbidity and mortality rates, R0 resection rates, and lymph node harvest rates.
CONCLUSION:Our initial experience demonstrates that RPD is feasible and safe in selected patients. It can be safely adopted without any compromise in patient outcomes compared to the open approach.