Robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: Is there any difference for frail patients?. (June 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Paolini, Claudia; Bencini, Lapo; Gabellini, Linda; Urciuoli, Irene; Pacciani, Sabrina; Tribuzi, Angela; Moraldi, Luca; Calistri, Massimo; Coratti, Andrea
• Is Part Of: Surgical oncology. Volume 37(2021)
• Publication Date: 2021-06
• Subjects: Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy -- Frail patients -- Elderly; Cancer -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Neoplasms -- surgery -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Chirurgie -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; 616.994059
• DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2020.12.009
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0960-7404

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Old age and frailty are predictors of early postoperative results after pancreatic surgery. We analysed the results of robotic and open pancreatoduodenectomy in elderly and frail patients. Methods: Data from the local robotic pancreatoduodenectomy database were reviewed and matched with those from open operations during the same period (2014–2020). Both old age and frailty were used to determine any correlation with postoperative outcomes. Elderly patients were defined as patients aged 70 years or more, while frailty was classified according to the validated modified Frailty Index. Results: A total of 118 pancreatoduodenectomies were included in the analysis: 65 (55.1%) robotic and 53 (44.9%) open. More than 50% of patients were frail. Overall, 7.6% of patients experienced grade IV Clavien-Dindo complications, and 3.4% died within 90 days after surgery. Frail patients experienced a similar rate of severe complications after robotic vs. open operations (5.3 vs. 11.6; p = 0.439) but earlier refeeding (3 days vs. 4 days; p = 0.006) and earlier drain removal (6 days vs. 7 days; p = 0.046) when operated on by a robotic approach. The oncological outcomes, including limphnodes retrieval, residual disease, recurrences, and survival, were not influenced by the surgical approach. Non-elderly patients also showed more benefits with the robotic approach (lower complication index, earlier refeeding, and drain removal). Conclusions: Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy is associated with risks of major complications that are comparable to those of open operation in frail patients. Some perioperative parameters (refeeding, drain removal) seem to favour robotics in frail patients and younger patients, although at the price of longer operating times. Highlights: Robotic and open pancreatoduodenectomy have similar risks of major complications in frail patients. Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy resulted to be oncologically adequate in early period. Time of refeeding and drain removal seem to favour robotics in frail patients and younger patients. Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy have longer operating times.