Taiga Wakabayashi, Federico Gaudenzi, Yusuke Nie, Kohei Mishima, Yoshiki Fujiyama, Kazuharu Igarashi, Yu Teshigahara, Sho Mineta, Emre Bozkurt, Go Wakabayashi
{"title":"机器人与开放式胰十二指肠切除术的胰瘘发生率降低及综合成本分析。","authors":"Taiga Wakabayashi, Federico Gaudenzi, Yusuke Nie, Kohei Mishima, Yoshiki Fujiyama, Kazuharu Igarashi, Yu Teshigahara, Sho Mineta, Emre Bozkurt, Go Wakabayashi","doi":"10.1007/s00464-025-11768-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has emerged as a promising surgical approach for the treatment of periampullary neoplasms, offering the potential benefits of minimally invasive surgery. However, the impact of RPD on clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (CR-PF) rates and overall costs compared to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) remains unclear, limiting its widespread adoption.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a high-volume Japanese referral center from 2017 to 2023. A total of 193 patients diagnosed with periampullary neoplasms underwent either RPD (n = 81) or OPD (n = 112). To account for potential selection bias, propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance patient demographics and clinical characteristics, resulting in two well-matched groups of 60 patients each. Perioperative outcomes, CR-PF rates, and a comprehensive cost analysis were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>RPD resulted in a significantly lower rate of CR-PF (10%) compared to OPD (33.3%) (p = 0.003). Additionally, patients who underwent RPD experienced shorter hospital stays (15 days) compared to those in the OPD group (22.5 days) (p < 0.001). Despite longer operative times for RPD (633 vs. 395 min; p < 0.001), total hospital costs were comparable between the two groups. The higher operative costs associated with RPD were offset by reduced postoperative complications and shorter hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RPD offers significant clinical advantages, including lower CR-PF rates and reduced hospital stays, without increasing overall hospital costs compared to OPD. These findings support the feasibility and potential benefits of adopting RPD for the management of periampullary neoplasms in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":22174,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques","volume":" ","pages":"3921-3929"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12116723/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reduced pancreatic fistula rates and comprehensive cost analysis of robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy.\",\"authors\":\"Taiga Wakabayashi, Federico Gaudenzi, Yusuke Nie, Kohei Mishima, Yoshiki Fujiyama, Kazuharu Igarashi, Yu Teshigahara, Sho Mineta, Emre Bozkurt, Go Wakabayashi\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00464-025-11768-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has emerged as a promising surgical approach for the treatment of periampullary neoplasms, offering the potential benefits of minimally invasive surgery. However, the impact of RPD on clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (CR-PF) rates and overall costs compared to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) remains unclear, limiting its widespread adoption.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a high-volume Japanese referral center from 2017 to 2023. A total of 193 patients diagnosed with periampullary neoplasms underwent either RPD (n = 81) or OPD (n = 112). To account for potential selection bias, propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance patient demographics and clinical characteristics, resulting in two well-matched groups of 60 patients each. Perioperative outcomes, CR-PF rates, and a comprehensive cost analysis were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>RPD resulted in a significantly lower rate of CR-PF (10%) compared to OPD (33.3%) (p = 0.003). Additionally, patients who underwent RPD experienced shorter hospital stays (15 days) compared to those in the OPD group (22.5 days) (p < 0.001). Despite longer operative times for RPD (633 vs. 395 min; p < 0.001), total hospital costs were comparable between the two groups. The higher operative costs associated with RPD were offset by reduced postoperative complications and shorter hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RPD offers significant clinical advantages, including lower CR-PF rates and reduced hospital stays, without increasing overall hospital costs compared to OPD. These findings support the feasibility and potential benefits of adopting RPD for the management of periampullary neoplasms in clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22174,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"3921-3929\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12116723/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-025-11768-4\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-025-11768-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reduced pancreatic fistula rates and comprehensive cost analysis of robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy.
Background: Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has emerged as a promising surgical approach for the treatment of periampullary neoplasms, offering the potential benefits of minimally invasive surgery. However, the impact of RPD on clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (CR-PF) rates and overall costs compared to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) remains unclear, limiting its widespread adoption.
Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a high-volume Japanese referral center from 2017 to 2023. A total of 193 patients diagnosed with periampullary neoplasms underwent either RPD (n = 81) or OPD (n = 112). To account for potential selection bias, propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance patient demographics and clinical characteristics, resulting in two well-matched groups of 60 patients each. Perioperative outcomes, CR-PF rates, and a comprehensive cost analysis were evaluated.
Results: RPD resulted in a significantly lower rate of CR-PF (10%) compared to OPD (33.3%) (p = 0.003). Additionally, patients who underwent RPD experienced shorter hospital stays (15 days) compared to those in the OPD group (22.5 days) (p < 0.001). Despite longer operative times for RPD (633 vs. 395 min; p < 0.001), total hospital costs were comparable between the two groups. The higher operative costs associated with RPD were offset by reduced postoperative complications and shorter hospitalization.
Conclusions: RPD offers significant clinical advantages, including lower CR-PF rates and reduced hospital stays, without increasing overall hospital costs compared to OPD. These findings support the feasibility and potential benefits of adopting RPD for the management of periampullary neoplasms in clinical practice.
期刊介绍:
Uniquely positioned at the interface between various medical and surgical disciplines, Surgical Endoscopy serves as a focal point for the international surgical community to exchange information on practice, theory, and research.
Topics covered in the journal include:
-Surgical aspects of:
Interventional endoscopy,
Ultrasound,
Other techniques in the fields of gastroenterology, obstetrics, gynecology, and urology,
-Gastroenterologic surgery
-Thoracic surgery
-Traumatic surgery
-Orthopedic surgery
-Pediatric surgery