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
Observational Study
. 2025 Nov 6;112(11):znaf153.
doi: 10.1093/bjs/znaf153.

Oncological outcome after robot-assisted versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for upfront resectable cancer in the pancreatic head: a nationwide cohort analysis

Affiliations
Observational Study

Oncological outcome after robot-assisted versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for upfront resectable cancer in the pancreatic head: a nationwide cohort analysis

Julia E Menso et al. Br J Surg. .

Abstract

Background: Robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) aims to enhance postoperative recovery compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD). Although recent randomized trials confirmed the short-term safety of RPD, they did not confirm superiority or assess oncological safety. This nationwide observational cohort study compares oncological outcome after RPD versus OPD in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCC) without vascular contact.

Methods: All consecutive patients undergoing RPD and OPD for upfront resectable PDAC and DCC without vascular contact on preoperative imaging in the Netherlands were included. Data were obtained from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (2016-2023). Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and R0-resection rate.

Results: Overall, 1675 patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for upfront resectable PDAC and DCC were included (375 RPD; 1300 OPD). Adjusted median OS was 23 months after RPD versus 22 months after OPD, with comparable 5-year survival rate (23.3% versus 22.4%, HR 0.96 [0.82-1.14], P = 0.665). The R0-resection rate was comparable (57.1% versus 59.7%, P = 0.368). RPD was associated with a shorter hospital stay (median 9 versus 11 days, P < 0.001) and comparable in-hospital/30-day (3.1% versus 2.6%, P = 0.618) and 90-day mortality rate (7.7% versus 6.2%, P = 0.276). In patients with PDAC, no differences in receipt (58.2% versus 58.7%, P = 0.900), time to start (median 54 versus 58 days, P = 0.107), or completion of adjuvant chemotherapy (30.4% versus 30.4%, P = 0.999) were observed.

Conclusions: In this nationwide study, oncological outcome including 5-year survival was comparable between patients undergoing RPD and OPD for upfront resectable PDAC and DCC without vascular contact without differences in the use of adjuvant therapy for PDAC.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Adjusted overall survival estimates in patients undergoing robot-assisted versus open pancreatoduodenectomy Adjusted overall survival per surgical approach (left) and difference in overall survival between approaches (right). RPD, robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy; OPD, open pancreatoduodenectomy.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Predictors for overall survival in the multivariable model The x-axis represents the independent prognostic value per variable for overall survival in a multivariable model including all potential predictors shown in the figure. A higher chi-square value corresponds to a higher independent prognostic value. ASA PS, ASA performance score; RPD, robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy; OPD, open pancreatoduodenectomy; OS, overall survival.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Forest plot of the impact of the surgical approach on overall survival per subgroup The forest plot of surgical approach effect (point estimate) on overall survival per subgroup with 95% confidence interval (error bar). Size of the squares are proportional to the number of patients. The interrupted line represents the average treatment effect. RPD, robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy; OPD, open pancreatoduodenectomy; PDAC, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; DCC, distal cholangiocarcinoma.

References

    1. Stoop TF, Javed AA, Oba A, Koerkamp BG, Seufferlein T, Wilmink JW et al. Pancreatic cancer. Lancet 2025;405:1182–1202 - PubMed
    1. Versteijne E, Vogel JA, Besselink MG, Busch ORC, Wilmink JW, Daams JG et al. Meta-analysis comparing upfront surgery with neoadjuvant treatment in patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Br J Surg 2018;105:946–958 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hong SM, Pawlik TM, Cho H, Aggarwal B, Goggins M, Hruban RH et al. Depth of tumor invasion better predicts prognosis than the current American Joint Committee on Cancer T classification for distal bile duct carcinoma. Surgery 2009;146:250–257 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Zhou Y, Liu S, Wu L, Wan T. Survival after surgical resection of distal cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prognostic factors. Asian J Surg 2017;40:129–138 - PubMed
    1. Klompmaker S, van Hilst J, Wellner UF, Busch OR, Coratti A, D'Hondt M et al. Outcomes after minimally-invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy: a pan-European propensity score matched study. Ann Surg 2020;271:356–363 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms