Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2015 Jan-Mar;19(1):e2014.00246.
doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2014.00246.

Distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy: a robotic or LESS approach

Carrie E Ryan  1 , Sharona B Ross  1 , Prashant B Sukharamwala  1 , Benjamin D Sadowitz  1 , Thomas W Wood  1 , Alexander S Rosemurgy  1
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy: a robotic or LESS approach

Carrie E Ryan et al. JSLS. 2015 Jan-Mar.

Abstract

Introduction: The role and application of robotic surgery are debated, particularly given the expansion of laparoscopy, especially laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery. This cohort study was undertaken to delineate differences in outcomes between LESS and robotic distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy.

Methods: With Institutional Review Board approval, patients undergoing LESS or robotic distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy from September 1, 2012, through December 31, 2014, were prospectively observed, and data were collected. The results are expressed as the median, with the mean ± SD.

Results: Thirty-four patients underwent a minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy: 18 with robotic and 16 with LESS surgery. The patients were similar in sex, age, and body mass index. Conversions to open surgery and estimated blood loss were similar. There were two intraoperative complications in the group that underwent the robotic approach. Time spent in the operating room was significantly longer with the robot (297 vs 254 minutes, P = .03), although operative duration (i.e., incision to closure) was not longer (225 vs 190 minutes; P = .15). Of the operations studied, 79% were undertaken for neoplastic processes. Tumor size was 3.5 cm for both approaches; R0 resections were achieved in all patients. Length of stay was similar in the two study groups (5 vs 4 days). There was one 30-day readmission after robotic surgery.

Conclusions: Patient outcomes are similar with LESS or robotic distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy. Robotic operations require more time in the operating room. Both are safe and efficacious minimally invasive operations that follow similar oncologic principles for similar tumors, and both should be in the surgeon's armamentarium for distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy.

Keywords: Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery; Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy; Robotic distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Placement of robotic and laparoscopic ports in a patient undergoing distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Jayaraman S, Gonen M, Brennan M, et al. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: evolution of a technique at a single institution. J Am Col Surg. 2010;211:503–509. - PubMed
    1. DiNorcia J, Schrope B, Lee M, et al. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy offers shorter hospital stays with fewer complications. J Gastrointest Surg. 2010;14:1804–1812. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baker M, Bentrem D, Ujiki M, Stocker S, Talamonti M. Adding days spent in readmission to the initial postoperative length of stay limits the perceived benefit of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy when compared with open distal pancreatectomy. Am J Surg. 2011;201:295–300. - PubMed
    1. Mehta S, Doumane G, Mura T, Nocca D, Fabre J. Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a single-institution case-control study. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:402–407. - PubMed
    1. Ammori B, Ayiomamitis G. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy: a UK experience and a systematic review of the literature. Surg Endosc. 2011;25:2084–2099. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources