A New Era of Bile Duct Repair: Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Hepaticojejunostomy.

BACKGROUND

Despite scientific evidence of the safety, efficacy, and in some cases superiority of minimally invasive surgery in hepato-pancreato-biliary procedures, there are scarce publications about bile duct repairs. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery versus laparoscopic surgery on bile duct repair in patients with post-cholecystectomy bile duct injury.

METHODS

This is a retrospective comparative study of our prospectively collected database of patients with bile duct injury who underwent robotic or laparoscopic hepaticojejunostomy.

RESULTS

Seventy-five bile duct repairs (40 by laparoscopic and 35 by robotic-assisted surgery) were treated from 2012 to 2018. Injury types were as follows: E1 (7.5% vs. 14.3%), E2 (22.5% vs. 14.3%), E3 (40% vs. 42.9%), E4 (22.5% vs. 28.6%), and E5 (7.5% vs. 0), for laparoscopic hepaticojejunostomy (LHJ) and robotic-assisted hepaticojejunostomy (RHJ) respectively. The overall morbidity rate was similar (LHJ 27.5% vs. RHJ 22.8%, P = 0.644), during an overall median follow-up of 28 (14-50) months. In the LHJ group, the actuarial primary patency rate was 92.5% during a median follow-up of 49 (43.2-56.8) months. While in the RHJ group, the actuarial primary patency rate was 100%, during a median follow-up of 16 (12-22) months. The overall primary patency rate was 96% (LHJ 92.5% vs. RHJ 100%, log-rank P = 0.617).

CONCLUSION

Our results showed that the robotic approach is similar to the laparoscopic regarding safety and efficacy in attaining primary patency for bile duct repair.