Robotic distal pancreatectomy with selective closure of pancreatic duct: surgical outcomes
- 59 Downloads
Pancreatic fistula is the main post-operative complication of distal pancreatectomy associated with other further complications, such as intra-abdominal abscesses, wound infection, sepsis, electrolyte imbalance, malabsorption and hemorrhage. Surgeons have tried various techniques to close the stump of the remaining pancreas, but the controversy regarding the impact of stapler closure and suture closure of the pancreatic stump is far from resolved. In this study, we reported our technique and results of robotic assisted distal pancreatectomy with ultrasound identification and consequent selective closure of pancreatic duct. Twenty-one patients underwent consecutive robotic-assisted distal pancreatectomy were included in our study. We describe our technique and analyzed the operative and peri-operative data including mean operative time, intra-operative bleeding, blood transfusions necessity, conversion rate, mortality and morbidity rate, pancreatic fistula rate and grade, time of refeeding and canalization, length of hospital stay and readmission. Median operative time was 260 min. No conversion occurred. Estimated blood loss was 100 mL (range 50–200). No blood transfusions were performed. Mortality rate was 0%. One (5%) patient had a major complication, while 9 (43%) patients had minor complications (grade I). Three (14%) patients developed pancreatic fistula (grade B), while two (10%) patients had a biochemical leak. No late pancreatic fistula and re-operation occurred. The refeeding was started at second day (range 1^–6^) and the median canalization time was 4 days (range 2–7). The median hospital stay was 6 days (range 3–25) with a readmission rate of 0%. Robotic distal pancreatectomy can be considered safe and feasible. Our technique is easily reproducible, with good surgical results.
KeywordsRobotic surgery Distal pancreatectomy Wirsung closure Surgical outcomes
Study conception and design: BP, LM. Acquisition of data: BP, LM, LB. Analysis and interpretation of data: BP, LM, LB, MF, MA and AC. Drafting of manuscript: LM, BP, MA, LB. Critical revision of manuscript: BP, LM, LB, MF, MA and AC.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Research involving human participants and/or animals
All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and later versions.
Informed consent was obtained from all patients.
- 5.Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) et al (2017) The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery 161(3):584–591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2016.11.014 (Epub 2016 Dec 28) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Pachter HL, Pennington R, Chassin J et al (1979) Simplified distal pancreatectomy with the Auto Suture stapler: preliminary clinical observations. Surgery 85:166–170Google Scholar
- 15.Finan KR, Cannon EE, Kim EJ et al (2009) Laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy: a comparison of outcomes. Am Surg 75(8):671–679Google Scholar
- 16.Guerra F, Pesi B, Amore Bonapasta S et al (2015) Challenges in robotic distal pancreatectomy: systematic review of current practice. Minerva Chir 70(4):241–247Google Scholar