-
- Huiyi Ou, Mengmin Chen, Kai Qin, Shiwei Zhao, Dan Li, Yusheng Shi, Yuanchi Weng, Georgios Gemenetzis, Xiaxing Deng, Chenghong Peng, Baiyong Shen, and Jiabin Jin.
- Department of General Surgery, Pancreatic Disease Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
- Ann. Surg. 2024 Jan 23.
ObjectiveTo assess short-term and long-term outcomes following robotic enucleation (REn) of tumors in the proximal pancreas.BackgroundDespite the advantages of preserving function via pancreatic enucleation, controversies persist, since this can be associated with severe complications, such as clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula, especially when performed near the main pancreatic duct. The safety and efficacy of REn in this context remain largely unknown.MethodsA retrospective analysis was performed of all patients who underwent REn for benign and low-grade malignant neoplasms in the pancreatic head and uncinate process between January 2005 and December 2021. Clinicopathologic, perioperative, and long-term outcomes were compared with a similar open enucleation (OEn) group.ResultsOf 146 patients, 92 underwent REn with a zero conversion-to-open rate. REn was superior to OEn in terms of shorter operative time (90.0 minutes vs 120.0 minutes, P<0.001), decreased blood loss (20.0 mL vs 100.0 min, P=0.001), and lower clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula rate (43.5% vs 61.1%, P=0.040). Bile leakage rate, major morbidity, 90-day mortality, and length of hospital stay were comparable between groups. No post-REn grade C POPF or grade IV/V complication was identified. Subgroup analyses for uncinate process tumors and proximity to the main pancreatic duct did not demonstrate inferior postoperative outcomes. In a median follow-up period of 50 months, REn outcomes were comparable to OEn regarding recurrence rate and pancreatic endocrine or exocrine function.ConclusionsREn for pancreatic head and uncinate process tumors improved clinically relevant outcomes without increased major complications compared to OEn, while demonstrating comparable long-term oncological and functional outcomes.Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.