Robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for distal cholangiocarcinoma: a multicenter propensity score-matched study.

Pancreatoduodenectomy is the only potentially curative treatment for distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCC). In this study, we sought to compare the perioperative and oncological outcomes of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) based on a multicenter propensity score-matched study. Consecutive patients with DCC who underwent RPD or OPD from five centers in China between January 2014 and June 2019 were included. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to identify independent prognosis factors for overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of these patients. A total of 217 patients and 228 patients underwent RPD and OPD, respectively. After PSM, 180 patients in each group were enrolled. There were no significant differences in operative time, lymph node harvest, intraoperative transfusion, vascular resection, R0 resection, postoperative major morbidity, reoperation, 90-day mortality, and long-term survival between the two groups before and after PSM. Whereas, compared with the OPD group, the RPD group had significantly lower estimated blood loss (150.0 ml vs. 250.0 ml; P < 0.001), and a shorter postoperative length of stay (LOS) (12.0 days vs. 15.0 days; P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), R0 resection, N stage, perineural invasion, and tumor differentiation significantly associated with OS and RFS of these patients. RPD was comparable to OPD in feasibility and safety. For patients with DCC, RPD resulted in similar oncologic and survival outcomes as OPD.

Xu S ，Zhang XP ，Zhao GD ，Zou WB ，Zhao ZM ，Hu MG ，Gao YX ，Tan XL ，Liu Q ，Liu R ... -  《-》

Perioperative and Oncological Outcomes of Robotic Versus Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Low-Risk Surgical Candidates: A Multicenter Propensity Score-Matched Study.

This study aimed to perform a multicenter comparison between robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). Previous comparisons of RPD versus OPD have only been carried out in small, single-center studies of variable quality. Consecutive patients who underwent RPD (n = 1032) or OPD (n = 1154) at 7 centers in China between July 2012 and July 2020 were included. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed. After PSM, 982 patients in each group were enrolled. The RPD group had significantly lower estimated blood loss (EBL) (190.0 vs 260.0 mL; P < 0.001), and a shorter postoperative 1length of hospital stay (LOS) (12.0 (9.0-16.0) days vs 14.5 (11.0-19.0) days; P < 0.001) than the OPD group. There were no significant differences in operative time, major morbidity including clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF), bile leakage, delayed gastric emptying, postoperative pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), reoperation, readmission or 90-day mortality rates. Multivariable analysis showed R0 resection, CR-POPF, PPH and reoperation to be independent risk factors for 90-day mortality. Subgroup analysis on patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) (n = 326 in each subgroup) showed RPD had advantages over OPD in EBL and postoperative LOS. There were no significant differences in median disease-free survival (15.2 vs 14.3 months, P = 0.94) or median overall survival (24.2 vs 24.1 months, P = 0.88) between the 2 subgroups. RPD was comparable to OPD in feasibility and safety. For patients with PDAC, RPD resulted in similar oncologic and survival outcomes as OPD.

Liu Q ，Zhao Z ，Zhang X ，Wang W ，Han B ，Chen X ，Tan X ，Xu S ，Zhao G ，Gao Y ，Gan Q ，Yuan J ，Ma Y ，Dong Y ，Liu Z ，Wang H ，Fan F ，Liu J ，Lau WY ，Liu R ... -  《-》

Long-term Outcomes After Laparoscopic, Robotic, and Open Pancreatoduodenectomy for Distal Cholangiocarcinoma: An International Propensity Score-matched Cohort Study.

This study aimed to compare surgical and oncological outcomes after minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA). A dCCA might be a good indication for MIPD, as it is often diagnosed as primary resectable disease. However, multicenter series on MIPD for dCCA are lacking. This is an international multicenter propensity score-matched cohort study including patients after MIPD or OPD for dCCA in 8 centers from 5 countries (2010-2021). Primary outcomes included overall survival (OS) and disease-free interval (DFI). Secondary outcomes included perioperative and postoperative complications and predictors for OS or DFI. Subgroup analyses included robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD). Overall, 478 patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for dCCA were included of which 97 after MIPD (37 RPD, 60 LPD) and 381 after OPD. MIPD was associated with less blood loss (300 vs 420 mL, P =0.025), longer operation time (453 vs 340 min; P <0.001), and less surgical site infections (7.8% vs 19.3%; P =0.042) compared with OPD. The median OS (30 vs 25 mo) and DFI (29 vs 18) for MIPD did not differ significantly between MIPD and OPD. Tumor stage (Hazard ratio: 2.939, P <0.001) and administration of adjuvant chemotherapy (Hazard ratio: 0.640, P =0.033) were individual predictors for OS. RPD was associated with a higher lymph node yield (18.0 vs 13.5; P =0.008) and less major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3b-5; 8.1% vs 32.1%; P =0.005) compared with LPD. Both surgical and oncological outcomes of MIPD for dCCA are acceptable as compared with OPD. Surgical outcomes seem to favor RPD as compared with LPD but more data are needed. Randomized controlled trials should be performed to confirm these findings.

Uijterwijk BA ，Lemmers DHL ，Bolm L ，Luyer M ，Koh YX ，Mazzola M ，Webber L ，Kazemier G ，Bannone E ，Ramaekers M ，Ielpo B ，Wellner U ，Koek S ，Giani A ，Besselink MG ，Abu Hilal M ，ISGACA consortium, the International study group on non-pancreatic periampullary cancer ... -  《-》

Robotic approach mitigates the effect of major complications on survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary cancer.

Major complications (MCs) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) are a known independent predictor of worse oncologic outcomes. There are limited data on the effect of major complications on long-term outcomes after robotic PD (RPD). The aim of this study is to compare the effect of MC on overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) after RPD and open PD (OPD). This is a single-center, retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of all patients undergoing PD for periampullary cancer including ampullary adenocarcinoma, distal cholangiocarcinoma, and duodenal carcinoma. Univariate analysis was performed on all clinical, pathologic, and treatment factors. MCs were defined as Clavien-Dindo ≥ grade 3. Kaplan-Maier survival analysis was performed with log-rank test for group comparison. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with overall survival (OS) in both the OPD and RPD groups. A total of 190 patients with ampullary carcinoma (n = 98), cholangiocarcinoma (n = 55), and duodenal adenocarcinoma (n = 37) were examined over the study period with 61.1% (n = 116) undergoing RPD and 38.9% (n = 74) undergoing OPD. There was no significant difference in patient demographics between the RPD and OPD cohorts. Furthermore, R0 resection rates, tumor size, and lymph node involvement were similar between the RPD and OPD cohorts. OPD had higher rate of MC (40.5% vs 28.3% in RPD, p = 0.011) including clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (25.7% vs 8.6%, p = 0.001) and wound infection (34.5% vs 13.8%, p < 0.001). MCs were associated with a lower OS in the OPD cohort (HR = 2.18, 95%CI 1.0-4.55, p = 0.038). MCs were not associated with OS in the RPD cohort (HR = 1.55, 95%CI 0.87-2.76, p = 0.14). MCs are associated with worse patient outcomes after OPD but not after RPD. Robotic approach mitigates and possibly abrogates the negative effects of MCs on patient outcomes after PD for malignancy and is associated with improved adjuvant chemotherapy completion rates.

Meyyappan T ，Wilson GC ，Zeh HJ ，Hogg ME ，Lee KK ，Zureikat AH ，Paniccia A ... -  《-》

Comparison of postoperative complications and long-term oncological outcomes in minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for distal cholangiocarcinoma: A propensity score-matched analysis.

Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is the only curative therapy for distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCC). There has been no study to compare outcomes between minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for dCC. The aim of the study is to compare the two operation types for dCC in terms of postoperative and oncologic outcomes. Data from 426 patients who underwent MIPD (n = 91) or OPD (n = 335) for dCC from January 2012 to December 2019 at two tertiary hospitals were retrospectively reviewed. After 1:2 propensity score matching, postoperative and oncologic outcomes were compared. Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy group showed more favorable results than OPD group in terms of blood loss (MIPD vs OPD, 250 [150-400] vs 400 [200-600], mL, P < .001), and length of hospital stay (19.8 ± 11.3 vs 26.6 ± 14.3 days, P < .001). OPD group showed more favorable results than MIPD group in terms of operation time (MIPD vs OPD, 457 ± 70 vs 398 ± 85 min, P < .001) and harvested lymph nodes (14.9 ± 7.8 vs 20.7 ± 11.5, P < .001). There was no statistical difference between the two groups in the R0 resection rate and complications. In long-term survival analysis, there was no significant difference between the two groups. Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy showed comparable postoperative complications and long-term oncologic survival with OPD in the treatment of dCC.

Kim SH ，Lee B ，Hwang HK ，Lee JS ，Han HS ，Lee WJ ，Yoon YS ，Kang CM ... -  《-》