Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and totally laparoscopic PD after overcoming learning curves with comparison of oncologic outcomes between open PD and minimally invasive PD.

BACKGROUNDS/AIMS: Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD), such as totally laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (TLPD) or robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RAPD), is increasingly performed worldwide. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes of TLPD and RAPD, and compare the oncologic outcomes between MIPD and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for malignant disease.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted at two hospitals that followed similar oncological surgical principles, including the extent of resection. RAPD was performed at Seoul National University Hospital, and TLPD at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. Patient demographics, perioperative outcomes, and oncological outcomes were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to compare oncologic outcomes between MIPD and OPD.

RESULTS

Between 2015 and 2020, 332 RAPD and 178 TLPD were performed. The rates of Clavian-Dindo grade ≥ 3 complications (19.3% vs. 20.2%, = 0.816), clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (9.9% vs. 11.8%, = 0.647), and open conversions (6.6% vs. 10.5%, = 0.163) were comparable between the two groups. The mean operation time (341 minutes vs. 414 minutes, < 0.001) and postoperative hospital stay were shorter in the RAPD group (11 days vs. 14 days, = 0.034). After PSM, the 5-year overall survival rate was comparable between MIPD and OPD for overall malignant disease (58.4% vs. 55.5%, = 0.180).

CONCLUSIONS

Both RAPD and TLPD are safe and feasible, and MIPD has clinical outcomes that are comparable to those of OPD. Although RAPD exhibits some advantages, its perioperative outcomes are similar to those associated with TLPD. A surgical method may be selected based on the convenience of surgical movements, medical costs, and operator experience.