Vascular control for difficult uncinate process dissection in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy.

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains one of the most advanced robotic procedures. Improved ergonomics and stable 3D vision with robotic platform helped overcome the technical challenges of pancreatic reconstruction in minimally invasive PD. However, inadequate understanding of the complex vascular anatomy of the pancreatic head and uncinate process often results in intra-operative bleeding and prolongs the learning curve. The technique of precise identification and systematic control of the vessels supplying the head and the uncinate process is described in this report. A good understanding of the common vascular anatomy and variations along with stepwise precise vascular control described in this report could minimise intra-operative bleeding and shorten the learning curve associated with robotic PD.

BackgroundPancreatoduodenectomy is a complex and challenging procedure that requires meticulous tissue dissection and proficient suturing skills. Minimally invasive surgery with the utilization of robotic platforms has demonstrated advantages in perioperative patient outcomes in retrospective studies. The development of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) in specific has progressed significantly, since first reported in 2003, and high-volume centers in pancreatic surgery are reporting large patient series with improved pain management and reduced length of stay. However, prospective studies to assess objectively the feasibility and safety of RPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) are currently lacking.Methods/designThe PORTAL trial is a multicenter randomized controlled, patient-blinded, parallel-group, phase III non-inferiority trial performed in seven high-volume centers for pancreatic and robotic surgery in China (> 20 RPD and > 100 OPD annually in each participating center). The trial is designed to enroll and randomly assign 244 patients with an indication for elective pancreatoduodenectomy for malignant periampullary and pancreatic lesions, as well as premalignant and symptomatic benign periampullary and pancreatic disease. The primary outcome is time to functional recovery postoperatively, measured in days. Secondary outcomes include postoperative morbidity and mortality, as well as perioperative costs. A sub-cohort of 128 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) will also be compared to assess the percentage of patients who undergo postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy within 8 weeks, in each arm. Secondary outcomes in this cohort will include patterns of disease recurrence, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival.DiscussionThe PORTAL trial is designed to assess the feasibility and safety of RPD compared to OPD, in terms of functional recovery as described previously. Additionally, this trial will explore whether RPD allows increased access to postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy, in a sub-cohort of patients with PDAC.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.govNCT04400357. Registered on May 22, 2020

Effect of robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy on postoperative length of hospital stay and complications for pancreatic head or periampullary tumours: a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial

Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy is an increasingly accepted alternative for the treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).1 However, the ability to perform a meticulous robotic-assisted superior mesenteric artery (SMA) dissection to obtain a margin-negative resection remains unknown.2 PDAC within the head of the pancreas (HOP) that involves the superior mesenteric vein (SMV) and portal vein (PV) requires total venous control (TVC) and a 'vein-to-the-right' (or anterior artery-first) approach to SMA dissection to minimize venous congestion and operative blood loss.3-5 Here, we demonstrate a robotic pancreatoduodenectomy with TVC and a 'vein-to-the-right' approach. A 70-year-old woman with cT2N0M0 HOP PDAC with lateral SMV involvement and right gastroepiploic vein occlusion underwent robotic pancreatoduodenectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. After transecting the pancreas, we achieved TVC by dividing the small venous tributaries and encircling the SMV, splenic vein, and PV. We then proceeded with a 'vein-to-the-right' approach. The inferior pancreatoduodenal arteries were divided to minimize HOP inflow and decrease specimen bleeding. Once the specimen was dissected off the periadventitial plane of the distal SMA, the SMV dissection was carefully performed using a partial side-wall vein resection using a vascular stapler. Total operative time was 7.5h and estimated blood loss was 25mL. The patient recovered well postoperatively and was discharged on postoperative day 3. Final pathology exhibited a 2.4cm, moderately to poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma with negative margins (ypT2N1, 2/38 lymph nodes positive). For tumors with lateral vein involvement, robotic pancreatoduodenectomy can be safely performed via TVC and a 'vein-to-the-right' approach.

Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy After Unsuspected Double Perforation (Bile Duct And Portal Vein) During Endoscopic Biliary Stent Placement

This video manuscript by Ikoma and colleagues demonstrates their approach to the superior mesenteric artery and hepatic artery periadventitial dissection. The quality of superior mesenteric artery and hepatic artery dissections should be maintained in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy when performed for pancreatic cancer, to provide the best possible oncological outcomes.

The role of the robotic approach for pancreaticoduodenectomy has not been well established with robust data. This study aimed to reappraise feasibility and justification of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) over time. A total of 500 patients undergoing RPD were enrolled and divided into early (first 250 patients) and late (last 250 patients) groups for a comparative study. The conversion rate was 8.8% overall and was significantly lower in the late group (5.6% vs. 12.0%; p = .012). The overall median intraoperative blood loss was 130 mL. Radicality of resection was similar between early and late groups. The overall surgical mortality after RPD was 1.3%. The overall surgical morbidity and major complication was 44.1% and 13.2%, respectively, and similar between early and late groups. Chyle leakage was the most common complication after RPD (25.0%), followed by postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The POPF rate was 8.6% overall, with 5.9% in the early group and 11.0% in the late group, p = .051. The overall delayed gastric emptying rate was 3.5%. The late group had better survival outcomes than those of the early group after RPD for ampullary adenocarcinoma (p = .027) but not for pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. Reappraisal of this study has confirmed that RPD is not only technically feasible without increasing surgical risks but also oncologically justified without compromising survival outcomes for both pancreatic head and other periampullary cancers over time. Moreover, RPD is associated with the benefits of low surgical mortality, blood loss, and delayed gastric emptying.

Open vs robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy, cost-effectiveness and long-term oncologic outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Though minimally invasive approaches have been readily incorporated into many areas of oncologic surgery, their use for pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has been less widespread. However, with the introduction of a robotic platform, surgeons have been able to overcome the technical challenges that limited the adoption of laparoscopic PD. Robotic PD (RPD) can now be performed with the same safety and oncologic outcome profile as open PD and is the preferred surgical approach in our institution. Here, we describe our technique for RPD, which separates the procedure into seven component steps: mobilization, dissection of the porta hepatis and pancreatic neck, uncinate process dissection, gallbladder removal, pancreaticojejunostomy, hepaticojejunostomy, and gastrojejunostomy.

Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) with involvement of the main pancreatic duct usually requires surgical resection. Consensus is lacking whether to partially or completely resect the pancreatic portion with a dilated main pancreatic duct. Intraoperative pancreatoscopy may be useful to determine the extent of IPMN to tailor surgical resection and was recently studied in a large prospective international study. IPMN is increasingly utilized using a robotic approach. Studies describing the technical approach to intraoperative pancreatoscopy in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic distal pancreatectomy are lacking. During robotic pancreatoduodenectomy, pancreatoscopy is performed once the pancreas neck is transected. The scope is advanced via a laparoscopic port into the left and right-sided pancreatic duct, guided by robotic graspers. During robotic distal pancreatectomy, pancreatoscopy is performed before complete parenchymal transection. The scope is advanced through an anterior ductotomy to examine the duct and guide the pancreatic transection line. Tips and tricks how to perform the procedure efficiently without complications are detailed. In total, 28 robot-assisted pancreatoscopies were performed during robotic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic distal pancreatectomy. No intraoperative complications resulting from the intraoperative pancreatoscopy were noted. In the 2 described procedures, the added time required to perform the pancreatoscopy was 6 and 17 minutes, respectively. Both patients recovered without complication and were discharged on postoperative day 5 for the robotic pancreatoduodenectomy and day 6 for the robotic distal pancreatectomy. Intraoperative pancreatoscopy can be safely performed during both robotic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic distal pancreatectomy for IPMN with the involvement of the main pancreatic duct. An international prospective study has recently been completed with this technique.

Learning Curves for Robotic Pancreatic Surgery

This study sought to identify the learning curves of console time (CT) for robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). Perioperative outcomes were compared between the early group of surgeries performed early in the learning curve and the late group of surgeries performed after the learning curve.Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a technically demanding and challenging procedure carrying a high morbidity.Data for RDP and RPD were prospectively collected for analysis. The learning curve was assessed by cumulative sum (CUSUM). Based on CUSUM analyses, patients were divided into the early group and the late group.There were 70 RDP and 61 RPD cases. It required 37 cases to overcome the learning curve for RDP and 20 cases for RPD. The median console time was significantly shorter in the late group for both RDP (112 minutes vs 225 minutes, P < .001) and RPD (360 minuntes vs 520 minutes, P < .001). Median blood loss was significantly less in the late group for both RDP (30 cc vs 100 cc, P = .003) and RPD (100 cc vs 200 cc, P < .001). No surgical mortality occurred in either group. Clinically relevant pancreatic fistula rate was 22.9% for RDP (32.4% in the early group vs 12.1% in the late group, P = .043), and 11.5% for RPD (0 in early group vs 17.1% in late group, P = .084).This study demonstrates that the RPD learning curve is 20 cases with prior experience of RDP and confirms the safety and feasibility of both RPD and RDP. Practice and familiarity with the robotic platform are likely to contribute to significant shortening of the learning curve in robotic pancreatic surgery, while knowledge and experience, in addition to practical skills, are also essential to minimize the potential surgical risks of RPD.

The robotic platform in pancreatic disease has gained popularity in the hepatobiliary community due to significant advantages it technically offers over conventional open and laparoscopic techniques. Despite promising initial studies, there remains scant literature on operative and oncologic outcomes of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. A retrospective review evaluated all RPD performed for pancreatic adenocarcinoma from 2008 to 2019 in a single tertiary institution. RPD cases were matched to open cases (OPD) by demographic and oncologic characteristics and outcomes compared using Mann-Whitney U test, log rank tests, and Kaplan-Meier methods. Thirty-eight RPD cases were matched to 38 OPD. RPD had significantly higher lymph node (LN) yield (21.5 vs 13.5; p = 0.0036) and no difference in operative time or estimated blood loss (EBL). RPD had significantly lower rate of delayed gastric emptying (DGE) (3% vs 32%; p = 0.0009) but no difference in leaks, infections, hemorrhage, urinary retention ,or ileus. RPD had significantly shorter length of stay (LOS) (7.5 vs. 9; p = 0.0209). There were no differences in 30- or 90-day readmissions or 90-day mortality. There was an equivalent R0 resection rate and LN positivity ratio. There was a trend towards improved median overall survival in RPD (30.4 vs. 23.0months; p = 0.1105) and longer time to recurrence (402 vs. 284days; p = 0.7471). OPD had two times the local recurrent rate (16% vs. 8%) but no difference in distant recurrence. While the feasibility and safety of RPD has been demonstrated, the impact on oncologic outcomes had yet to be investigated. We demonstrate that RPD not only offers similar if not superior immediate post-operative benefit by decreasing DGE but more importantly may offer improved oncologic outcomes. The significantly higher LN yield and decreased inflammatory response demonstrated in robotic surgery may improve overall survival.

Background: With population aging and the increasing incidence of pancreatic and periampullary malignancies, more elderly patients are being considered for pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Although robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) is steadily adopted, evidence regarding its safety in patients aged ≥ 75 years remains limited, particularly in centers with restricted access to robotic platforms. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective single-center study including patients who underwent PD between January 2019 and September 2025. Outcomes after RPD were compared between patients aged < 75 and ≥75 years. In addition, elderly patients undergoing RPD were compared with elderly patients undergoing open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) using 1:2 propensity score matching. The primary endpoint was major postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III). Results: Among 525 PDs, 130 (25%) were performed robotically, including 29 patients aged ≥ 75 years. Within the RPD cohort, age ≥ 75 years was not associated with an increased risk of major complications compared with younger patients (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.23-1.76; p = 0.45), nor with higher 90-day mortality. In the propensity score-matched elderly cohort, major morbidity was similar between RPD and OPD (10% vs. 7%; p = 0.68). RPD was associated with a significantly lower 30-day readmission rate, despite a higher incidence of delayed gastric emptying, mainly driven by mild (grade A) cases. Conclusions: RPD appears to be safe in carefully selected patients aged ≥ 75 years, with morbidity and mortality comparable to those observed in younger RPD patients and in elderly patients undergoing open surgery. These findings support the selective use of RPD in elderly patients, even in centers with limited access to robotic platforms.

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has been increasingly performed for patients with periampullary tumours and tumours in the pancreatic head. This method offers several technical advantages compared to open and laparoscopic surgeries. However, the surgical results often vary depending on the experience of different pancreatic centres. A retrospective study of our first 55 cases of RPD from August 2016 to April 2020 was conducted to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of RPD and to summarize the operative experiences in a single intuition. Benign and malignant tumours in the pancreatic head or periampullary tumours without obvious vascular and adjacent organ invasion were included in this study. Perioperative characteristics and postoperative complications of the enrolled patients were retrospectively collected. The first 17 cases were robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RA-LPD) and the remaining 38 patients underwent total RPD. The RA-LPD group had a remarkably longer operative time than the total RPD group (415.3±89.2 vs. 362.4±75.6 min, P=0.047). The incidences of biliary leakage, chyle leakage, DGE, intra-abdominal infection and intra-abdominal haemorrhage were 3.6%, 0.0%, 5.5%, 9.1% and 5.5%, respectively. Two patients underwent relaparotomy due to severe intra-abdominal haemorrhage. The median length of hospital stay was 14 (11 to 19) days. There were no deaths during the perioperative period. RPD is a technically feasible procedure for selected patients with periampullary tumours and tumours in the pancreatic head in experienced hands.