Minimally invasive robot-assisted and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in a pan-European registry a retrospective cohort study
van Bodegraven, Eduard A van Ramshorst, Tess M E Bratlie, Svein O Kokkola, Arto Sparrelid, Ernesto Björnsson, Bergthor Kleive, Dyre Burgdorf, Stefan K Dokmak, Safi Groot Koerkamp, Bas
van Bodegraven, Eduard A
van Ramshorst, Tess M E
Bratlie, Svein O
Kokkola, Arto
Sparrelid, Ernesto
Björnsson, Bergthor
Kleive, Dyre
Burgdorf, Stefan K
Dokmak, Safi
Groot Koerkamp, Bas
Citations
Altmetric:
Affiliation
Other Contributors
Publication date
2024-03-18
Collections
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Abstract
Background: International guidelines recommend monitoring of the use and outcome of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS). However, data from prospective international audits on minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) are lacking. This study examined the use and outcome of robot-assisted (RDP) and laparoscopic (LDP) distal pancreatectomy in the E-MIPS registry.
Materials and methods: Post-hoc analysis in a prospective audit on MIPS, including consecutive patients undergoing MIDP in 83 centers from 19 European countries (01-01-2019/31-12-2021). Primary outcomes included intraoperative events (grade 1: excessive blood loss, grade 2: conversion/change in operation, grade 3: intraoperative death), major morbidity, and in-hospital/30-day mortality. Multivariable logistic regression analyses identified high-risk groups for intraoperative events. RDP and LDP were compared in the total cohort and in high-risk groups.
Results: Overall, 1672 patients undergoing MIDP were included; 606 (36.2%) RDP and 1066 (63.8%) LDP. The annual use of RDP increased from 30.5% to 42.6% (P<0.001). RDP was associated with fewer grade 2 intraoperative events compared to LDP (9.6% vs. 16.8%, P<0.001), with longer operating time (238 vs. 201 minutes,P<0.001). No significant differences were observed between RDP and LDP regarding major morbidity (23.4% vs. 25.9%, P=0.264) and in-hospital/30-day mortality (0.3% vs. 0.8%, P=0.344). Three high-risk groups were identified; BMI>25 kg/m2, previous abdominal surgery, and vascular involvement. In each group, RDP was associated with fewer conversions and longer operative times.
Conclusion: This European registry-based study demonstrated favorable outcomes for MIDP, with mortality rates below 1%. LDP remains the predominant approach, whereas the use of RDP is increasing. RDP was associated with less conversions and longer operative time, including in high-risk subgroups. Future randomized trials should confirm these findings and assess cost differences.
Citation
van Bodegraven EA, van Ramshorst TME, Bratlie SO, Kokkola A, Sparrelid E, Björnsson B, Kleive D, Burgdorf SK, Dokmak S, Groot Koerkamp B, Cabús SS, Molenaar IQ, Boggi U, Busch OR, Petrič M, Roeyen G, Hackert T, Lips DJ, D'Hondt M, Coolsen MME, Ferrari G, Tingstedt B, Serrablo A, Gaujoux S, Ramera M, Khatkov I, Ausania F, Souche R, Festen S, Berrevoet F, Keck T, Sutcliffe RP, Pando E, de Wilde RF, Aussilhou B, Krohn PS, Edwin B, Sandström P, Gilg S, Seppänen H, Vilhav C, Abu Hilal M, Besselink MG; European Consortium on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (E-MIPS). Minimally invasive robot-assisted and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in a pan-European registry a retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg. 2024 Jun 1;110(6):3554-3561. doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000001315.
Type
Article