Skip to content
Open access

Short-term outcomes of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy during implementation stage: A comparison with open surgery

Oct 2026 · Annaly khirurgicheskoy gepatologii = Annals of HPB surgery · 0 citations · 7 references

TL;DR

The implementation stage of robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenal resection has already demonstrated a positive trend, including a reduction in the number of wound complications, the incidence of pancreatic fistulas, and the length of hospital stay, as well as an increase in the rate of achieving the target outcome.

Abstract

Aim. To evaluate the short-term outcomes of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy during the implementation stage compared with open pancreatoduodenal resection. Material and methods. A single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted. The study analyzed the outcomes of 114 open and 52 robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy procedures performed between 2017 and 2025. To reduce the risk of systematic error, Propensity Score Matching (PSM) was performed. Results. The majority of the measured parameters were comparable. The median operative time in the robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy group was significantly longer both before and after PSM ( p = 0.013). No statistically significant differences were observed in the incidence of postoperative complications classified as Clavien-Dindo ≥3, the median cumulative complication index, or in-hospital mortality. Prior to PSM, the robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy group exhibited a significantly lower incidence of wound complications (3.8 % vs. 14 %). However, after PSM, the differences were not statistically significant ( p = 0.141). The results of the PSM procedure indicated a lower incidence of pancreatic fistula in the robotic-assisted pancreas surgery group (25 % vs. 33.3 %; p = 0.071). Following PSM, the in-hospital mortality ratewas recorded as 4.9 % and 7.6 %, respectively ( p = 0.169). In the group that underwent robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy, four deaths occurred among the initial 30 surgeries. Subsequent mortality was not observed. Conclusion. After performing more than 50 robotic pancreatoduodenectomy procedures, satisfactory results comparable to those of open surgery were achieved. Moreover, the implementation stage of robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenal resection has already demonstrated a positive trend, including a reduction in the number of wound complications, the incidence of pancreatic fistulas, and the length of hospital stay, as well as an increase in the rate of achieving the target outcome.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Oct 2026

Adjusted trend analysis in the adoption and outcomes of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy approaches: over a decade of contemporary U.S. data.

Over the study period, OPD declined while MIPD adoption increased substantially, driven primarily by rapid growth in RPD, which may reflect increasing institutional experience and maturation of the technique.

L. Foroutani, Allison Chang, Architha Kannan et al. · 0 citations
Open access Sep 2026

Surgical outcomes after robot-assisted versus laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy: multicentre propensity-matched comparison from the Italian Group of Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery

Abstract Background Minimally invasive approaches to pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) are increasingly being adopted worldwide. However, direct comparisons between laparoscopic PD (LPD) and robot-assisted PD (RPD) remain limited and inconclusive. This study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes between LPD and RPD within a...

G. Quero, R. Menghi, N. Napoli et al. · 0 citations
Sep 2026

Minimally invasive thoracolaparoscopic versus open esophagectomy for benign and malignant esophageal diseases: a single-center comparative experience

Aim: The aim of the present study was to compare thoracolaparoscopic MIE and OE in a single-center cohort including both benign and malignant esophageal diseases, with emphasis on perioperative outcomes, postoperative complications, early mortality, and adjusted predictors of overall postoperative morbidity. Materials...

K. Kanatov, A. Shokebaev, N. Imammyrzayev et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.