ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018
Operative technique in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) at University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC): 17 steps standardized technique : Lessons learned since the first worldwide RPD performed in the year 2001.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
38 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.
- Step-by-Step Description of Standardized Technique for Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomy.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Guideline
- The optimal choice for patients underwent minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis including patient subgroups.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Early clinical impact of mesenteric Kocherization in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a propensity score-matched comparative study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Minimally Invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Cancer: Current Perspectives and Future Directions.Cancers · 2026Review
- Review
- Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Role of the EUS in the Treatment of Biliopancreatic Disease in Patients with Surgically Altered Anatomy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- The implementation of a robotic surgical platform for the treatment of patients with malignant or pre-malignant pancreatic tumors at the University Medical Center Ljubljana.Radiology and oncology · 2025Article
- The Trunk of Henle and Belcher's Vein: Important Venous Landmarks in Robot-Assisted Pancreatoduodenectomy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Comparison of Reduced-Port Totally Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy with Conventional Totally Robotic and Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Robotic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma after the learning curve: a propensity score-matched analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- International consensus guidelines on robotic pancreatic surgery in 2023.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2024Review
- Pancreatojejunostomy: standing on the shoulders of giants. A single centre retrospective analysis.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- [Anastomotic techniques in minimally invasive hepatobiliopancreatic surgery].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- The influence of procedural volume on short-term outcomes for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy-a cohort study and a learning curve analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- A duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy for small main pancreatic duct and soft pancreas in minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Morbidity and survival after laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy: propensity score matched comparison.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
- Comparison of surgical outcomes among open, laparoscopic, and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy: a single-center retrospective study.BMC surgery · 2022Article
- Short-term and pathologic outcomes of robotic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for periampullary and pancreatic head malignancy: an early experience.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Article
- Learning curve of three European centers in laparoscopic, hybrid laparoscopic, and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) was introduced in the attempt to improve the outcomes of the open approach. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) was first reported by Gagner and Pomp (Surg Endosc 8:408-410, 1994). Unfortunately, due to its complexity and technical demand, LPD never reached widespread popularity. Since it was first performed by P. C. Giulianotti in 2001, Robotic PD (RPD) has been gaining ground among surgeons. MIPD is included as a surgical option in the latest NCCN Guidelines. However, lack of surgical standardization, however, has limited the reproducibility of MIPD and made the acquisition of the technique by other surgeons difficult. We provide an accurate description of our standardized step-by-step RDP technique.
methodsWe took advantage of our 15-year long experience and > 150 cases performed to provide a step-by-step guidance of our RPD standardized technique. The description includes practical "tips and tricks" to facilitate the learning curve and assist with the teaching/evaluation process.
results17 surgical steps were identified as key components of the RPD procedure. The steps reflect the subdivision of the RPD into several parts which help to understand a strategy that takes into accounts specific anatomical landmarks and the demands of the robotic platform.
conclusionsStandardization is a key element of the learning curve of RPD. It can potentially provide consistent, reproducible results that can be more easily evaluated. Despite promising results, full acceptance of RPD as the 'gold standard' is still work in progress. Randomized-controlled trials with the application of a standardized technique are necessary to better define the role of RPD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.