Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34304274›Full record

Observational studyWorld journal of surgery2021

Robotic Dual-Console Distal Pancreatectomy: Could it be Considered a Safe Approach and Surgical Teaching even in Pancreatic Surgery? A Retrospective Observational Study Cohort.

M De Pastena, R Salvia, S Paiella, G Deiro, E Bannone, A Balduzzi, T Giuliani, L Casetti, M Ramera, C Filippini and 3 more

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in World journal of surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

M De PastenaDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5244-4357
R SalviaDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
S PaiellaDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
G DeiroDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
E BannoneDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
A BalduzziDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
T GiulianiDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
L CasettiDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
M RameraDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
C FilippiniDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
G MontagniniDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
L LandoniDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
A EspositoDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy. alessandro.esposito@aovr.veneto.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe study aims to assess the safety and feasibility of the robotic dual-console during a robotic distal pancreatectomy

methodsThe data of the consecutive patients submitted to RDP from 2012 to 2019 at the Verona University were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. The patients submitted to RDP were divided into the dual-console platform group (DG) and compared to the standard robotic procedure group (SG).

resultsIn the study period, 102 robotic distal pancreatectomies were performed, of whom 42 patients (41%) belonged to the DG and 60 patients (59%) to the SG. Higher operation time was recorded in the DG compared to the SG (410 vs. 265 min, p < 0.001). The overall conversion rate of the series was 7% (n 7 patients). All the conversions were observed in the SG (p = 0.021). No differences in morbidity or pancreatic fistula rate were recorded (p > 0.05). No mortality events in the 90th postoperative days were reported in this series.

conclusionsThe robotic dual-console approach for distal pancreatectomy is safe, feasible, and reproducible. The postoperative surgical outcomes are comparable to the standard RDP with the single-console da Vinci Surgical System®. This surgical technique can widely and safely improve the robotic surgical training program.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyPancreatic NeoplasmsRoboticsRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansOperative TimePancreatectomyPancreatic FistulaRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID34304274
PMCPMC8408081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.