Oncologic Efficacy of Robotic Compared to Open Total Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Cancer.

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Jordan McKean, Austin Parrish, Doga Kahramangil Baytar, Alessandro Paniccia, Steven Hughes, Ibrahim Nassour
{"title":"Oncologic Efficacy of Robotic Compared to Open Total Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Cancer.","authors":"Jordan McKean, Austin Parrish, Doga Kahramangil Baytar, Alessandro Paniccia, Steven Hughes, Ibrahim Nassour","doi":"10.1016/j.jss.2024.10.043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The use of robotic surgery for pancreatic cancer resections is increasing over time. There are multiple studies comparing this approach to open surgery, specifically for Whipple and distal pancreatectomies. But there are limited data on its feasibility and oncologic efficacy in patients requiring total pancreatectomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective study from the 2010 to 2019 National Cancer Database comparing the postoperative, pathological, and long-term oncologic outcomes between robotic total pancreatectomy (RTP) and open total pancreatectomy (OTP) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred eighty-eight (5%) RTP and 3447 (95%) OTP patients were identified. The number of RTP increased from four in 2010 to 32 in 2019. There were no major differences in patient demographics and treatment characteristics, except that RTP patients were more likely to be performed at nonacademic centers and less likely to get radiation. After adjustment, there was similar yield of examined lymph nodes, rate of positive margin, 90-d mortality and receipt of adjuvant therapy between both groups. RTP was associated with a statistically significant shorter length of stay than OTP (9 versus 11 d respectively, P value <0.001). There was no difference in median overall survival between RTP and OTP (22.3 mo versus 23.3 mo, P value 0.688). The 1-, 3-, and 5-y overall survival rates for RTP were 78%, 31%, and 34% and those for OTP were 75%, 38%, and 30%, respectively. After adjustment, the use of robotic surgery was associated with similar overall survival to the open approach (hazard ratio 0.939, 95% confidence interval 0.760-1.161).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RTP is associated with similar short- and long-term mortality without sacrificing oncologic outcomes including adequate lymphadenectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy receipt with the advantage of shorter length of stay.</p>","PeriodicalId":17030,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Surgical Research","volume":"305 ","pages":"19-25"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Surgical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2024.10.043","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The use of robotic surgery for pancreatic cancer resections is increasing over time. There are multiple studies comparing this approach to open surgery, specifically for Whipple and distal pancreatectomies. But there are limited data on its feasibility and oncologic efficacy in patients requiring total pancreatectomy.

Methods: This is a retrospective study from the 2010 to 2019 National Cancer Database comparing the postoperative, pathological, and long-term oncologic outcomes between robotic total pancreatectomy (RTP) and open total pancreatectomy (OTP) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Results: One hundred eighty-eight (5%) RTP and 3447 (95%) OTP patients were identified. The number of RTP increased from four in 2010 to 32 in 2019. There were no major differences in patient demographics and treatment characteristics, except that RTP patients were more likely to be performed at nonacademic centers and less likely to get radiation. After adjustment, there was similar yield of examined lymph nodes, rate of positive margin, 90-d mortality and receipt of adjuvant therapy between both groups. RTP was associated with a statistically significant shorter length of stay than OTP (9 versus 11 d respectively, P value <0.001). There was no difference in median overall survival between RTP and OTP (22.3 mo versus 23.3 mo, P value 0.688). The 1-, 3-, and 5-y overall survival rates for RTP were 78%, 31%, and 34% and those for OTP were 75%, 38%, and 30%, respectively. After adjustment, the use of robotic surgery was associated with similar overall survival to the open approach (hazard ratio 0.939, 95% confidence interval 0.760-1.161).

Conclusions: RTP is associated with similar short- and long-term mortality without sacrificing oncologic outcomes including adequate lymphadenectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy receipt with the advantage of shorter length of stay.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
4.50%
发文量
627
审稿时长
138 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Surgical Research: Clinical and Laboratory Investigation publishes original articles concerned with clinical and laboratory investigations relevant to surgical practice and teaching. The journal emphasizes reports of clinical investigations or fundamental research bearing directly on surgical management that will be of general interest to a broad range of surgeons and surgical researchers. The articles presented need not have been the products of surgeons or of surgical laboratories. The Journal of Surgical Research also features review articles and special articles relating to educational, research, or social issues of interest to the academic surgical community.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信