Back to Journals » Robotic Surgery: Research and Reviews » Volume 2

Robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy: safety and feasibility

Authors Kauffmann E, Napoli N, Belluomini M, Miccoli M, Brozzetti S, Boggi U

Received 2 January 2015

Accepted for publication 17 February 2015

Published 4 June 2015 Volume 2015:2 Pages 65—71


Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Masoud Azodi

Emanuele Federico Kauffmann,1 Niccolò Napoli,1 Mario A Belluomini,1 Mario Miccoli,2 Stefania Brozzetti,3 Ugo Boggi1

1Division of General and Transplant Surgery, 2Biostatistics Unit Research, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy; 3Pietro Valdoni Department of Surgery, University of Rome La Sapienza, Rome, Italy

Background: The availability of robotic assistance could make laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy safely feasible. We herein provide a systematic review on laparoscopic robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RAPD).
Methods: Literature search was conducted on multiple databases considering articles published in English up to October 31, 2014, reporting on ten or more patients.
Results: A total of 262 articles were identified. Excluding duplicates (n=172), studies not matching inclusion criteria (n=77), and studies not suitable for other reasons (n=6), a total of seven studies reporting on 312 RAPDs were eventually reviewed. These studies were either retrospective cohort studies (n=4) or case-matched studies (n=3). No randomized controlled trial was identified. Most patients undergoing RAPD were diagnosed with malignant tumors (224/312; 71.8%). RAPD was feasible in most patients. Conversion to open surgery was reported in 9.2% of the patients. A hybrid RAPD technique, employing standard laparoscopy or open surgery through a mini-incision, was adopted in most patients (178/312; 57.0%). Overall, there were six postoperative deaths at 30 days (6/312; 1.9%), including one intraoperative death caused by portal vein injury, while 137 out of 260 patients with complete information developed postoperative complications (52.7%). The mean length of hospital stay ranged from 10–29 days. Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) occurred in 66 patients (66/312; 21.1%). Grade C POPF was reported in eight patients (8/312; 2.5%). The costs of RAPD were assessed in two studies, demonstrating additional costs ranging from 4,000–5,000 US dollars to 6,193 Euro. The mean number of examined lymph nodes and the rate of positive surgical margins indicate that RAPD could be an appropriate oncologic operation.
Conclusion: RAPD is safely feasible. These results were obtained in selected patients and in specialized centers. RAPD should not be implemented in the occasional patient by surgeons without advanced laparoscopic skills and formal training in robotic surgery.

Keywords: robotic surgery, da Vinci, pancreaticoduodenectomy, pancreatectomy, laparoscopy

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]


Readers of this article also read:

Robot-assisted surgery in gynecological oncology: a review

Liberman EC, Goldberg GL, Kuo DY

Robotic Surgery: Research and Reviews 2015, 2:81-94

Published Date: 23 September 2015

Robot-assisted hysterectomy: a critical evaluation

Buderath P, Aktas B, Heubner M, Kimmig R

Robotic Surgery: Research and Reviews 2015, 2:51-58

Published Date: 18 March 2015

Outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in high-risk prostate cancer patients: experience in 34 patients with oncologic and functional outcomes

Canda AE, Atmaca AF, Cakici OU, Gok B, Arslan ME, Altinova S, Akbulut Z, Balbay MD

Robotic Surgery: Research and Reviews 2015, 2:29-35

Published Date: 16 February 2015

Green synthesis of water-soluble nontoxic polymeric nanocomposites containing silver nanoparticles

Prozorova GF, Pozdnyakov AS, Kuznetsova NP, Korzhova SA, Emel’yanov AI, Ermakova TG, Fadeeva TV, Sosedova LM

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2014, 9:1883-1889

Published Date: 16 April 2014

Methacrylic-based nanogels for the pH-sensitive delivery of 5-Fluorouracil in the colon

Ashwanikumar N, Kumar NA, Nair SA, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5769-5779

Published Date: 15 November 2012

A novel preparation method for silicone oil nanoemulsions and its application for coating hair with silicone

Hu Z, Liao M, Chen Y, Cai Y, Meng L, Liu Y, Lv N, Liu Z, Yuan W

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5719-5724

Published Date: 12 November 2012

Cross-linked acrylic hydrogel for the controlled delivery of hydrophobic drugs in cancer therapy

Deepa G, Thulasidasan AK, Anto RJ, Pillai JJ, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:4077-4088

Published Date: 27 July 2012

Crystallization after intravitreal ganciclovir injection

Pitipol Choopong, Nattaporn Tesavibul, Nattawut Rodanant

Clinical Ophthalmology 2010, 4:709-711

Published Date: 14 July 2010