Skip to main content
Log in

Robotic distal pancreatectomy with selective closure of pancreatic duct: surgical outcomes

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Updates in Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Pancreatic fistula is the main post-operative complication of distal pancreatectomy associated with other further complications, such as intra-abdominal abscesses, wound infection, sepsis, electrolyte imbalance, malabsorption and hemorrhage. Surgeons have tried various techniques to close the stump of the remaining pancreas, but the controversy regarding the impact of stapler closure and suture closure of the pancreatic stump is far from resolved. In this study, we reported our technique and results of robotic assisted distal pancreatectomy with ultrasound identification and consequent selective closure of pancreatic duct. Twenty-one patients underwent consecutive robotic-assisted distal pancreatectomy were included in our study. We describe our technique and analyzed the operative and peri-operative data including mean operative time, intra-operative bleeding, blood transfusions necessity, conversion rate, mortality and morbidity rate, pancreatic fistula rate and grade, time of refeeding and canalization, length of hospital stay and readmission. Median operative time was 260 min. No conversion occurred. Estimated blood loss was 100 mL (range 50–200). No blood transfusions were performed. Mortality rate was 0%. One (5%) patient had a major complication, while 9 (43%) patients had minor complications (grade I). Three (14%) patients developed pancreatic fistula (grade B), while two (10%) patients had a biochemical leak. No late pancreatic fistula and re-operation occurred. The refeeding was started at second day (range 1^–6^) and the median canalization time was 4 days (range 2–7). The median hospital stay was 6 days (range 3–25) with a readmission rate of 0%. Robotic distal pancreatectomy can be considered safe and feasible. Our technique is easily reproducible, with good surgical results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. DeOliveira ML, Winter JM, Schafer M et al (2006) Assessment of complications after pancreatic surgery: a novel grading system applied to 633 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 244(6):931–937 (discussion 937–9)

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Yeo TP, Hruban RH, Leach SD et al (2002) Pancreatic cancer. Curr Probl Cancer 26(4):176–275

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Knaebel HP, Diener MK, Wente MN et al (2005) Systematic review and meta-analysis of technique for closure of the pancreatic remnant after distal pancreatectomy. Br J Surg 92(5):539–546

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) et al (2017) The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery 161(3):584–591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2016.11.014 (Epub 2016 Dec 28)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Takeuchi K, Tsuzuki Y, Ando T et al (2003) Distal pancreatectomy: is staple closure beneficial? ANZ J Surg 73(11):922–925

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kleeff J, Diener MK, Z’Graggen K et al (2007) Distal pancreatectomy: risk factors for surgical failure in 302 consecutive cases. Ann Surg 245(4):573–582

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Bassi C, Butturini G, Falconi M et al (1999) Prospective randomised pilot study of management of the pancreatic stump following distal resection. HPB 1(4):203–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Diener MK, Seiler CM, Rossion I et al (2011) Efficacy of stapler versus hand-sewn closure after distal pancreatectomy (DISPACT): a randomised, controlled multicentre trial. Lancet 30:1514–1522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Pachter HL, Pennington R, Chassin J et al (1979) Simplified distal pancreatectomy with the Auto Suture stapler: preliminary clinical observations. Surgery 85:166–170

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ohwada S, Ogawa T, Tanahashi Y et al (1998) Fibrin glue sandwich prevents pancreatic fistula following distal pancreatectomy. World J Surg 22:494–498

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cogbill TH, Moore EE, Morris JA Jr et al (1991) Distal pancreatectomy for trauma: a multicenter experience. J Trauma 31(12):1600–1606

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sharpe SM, Talamonti MS, Wang E et al (2015) The laparoscopic approach to distal pancreatectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma results in shorter lengths of stay without compromising oncologic outcomes. Am J Surg 209(3):557–563

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Jayaraman S, Gonen M, Brennan MF et al (2010) Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: evolution of a technique at a single institution. J Am Coll Surg 211(4):503–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.06.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Finan KR, Cannon EE, Kim EJ et al (2009) Laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy: a comparison of outcomes. Am Surg 75(8):671–679

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Guerra F, Pesi B, Amore Bonapasta S et al (2015) Challenges in robotic distal pancreatectomy: systematic review of current practice. Minerva Chir 70(4):241–247

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Karabicak I, Satoi S, Yanagimoto H et al (2017) Comparison of surgical outcomes of three different stump closure techniques during distal pancreatectomy. Pancreatology 17(3):497–503

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Yui R, Satoi S, Toyokawa H et al (2014) Less morbidity after introduction of a new departmental policy for patients who undergo open distal pancreatectomy. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 21(1):72–77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Study conception and design: BP, LM. Acquisition of data: BP, LM, LB. Analysis and interpretation of data: BP, LM, LB, MF, MA and AC. Drafting of manuscript: LM, BP, MA, LB. Critical revision of manuscript: BP, LM, LB, MF, MA and AC.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benedetta Pesi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and later versions.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all patients.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 14 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moraldi, L., Pesi, B., Bencini, L. et al. Robotic distal pancreatectomy with selective closure of pancreatic duct: surgical outcomes. Updates Surg 71, 145–150 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-018-0605-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-018-0605-6

Keywords

Navigation