ArticleMaedica2025
Early Experience with Robotic Pancreatic Resections: a Retrospective Cohort Study of 20 Consecutive Cases.
Article in Maedica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Robotic pancreatic surgery has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative to open procedures, offering potential benefits in precision and recovery. This study evaluates the feasibility, safety and learning curve of robotic duodenopancreatectomy (RDP) and robotic distal splenopancreatectomy (RDSP) during the initial phase of implementation at a single institution. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 20 consecutive patients, who underwent RDP (n=12) or RDSP (n=8) between January 2020 and December 2022, was performed. Data on operative time, intraoperative blood loss, conversion rates, postoperative complications (classified by Clavien-Dindo and ISGPS criteria) and length of hospital stay (LOS) were collected. Early (first six RDPs and four RDSPs) and late cases were compared to assess progression along the learning curve. Statistical analysis included Mann-Whitney U and Fisher's exact tests. Results: The median operative time for RDP decreased from 480 minutes [interquartile range (IQR) 420-540] in early cases to 390 minutes (IQR 360-420) in later cases (p=0.03). The operative time for RDSP remained stable at 300 minutes (IQR 240-360; p=0.12). Intraoperative blood loss was 200 mL (IQR 100-400) for RDP and 150 mL (IQR 50-300) for RDSP. Two RDP cases (16.7%) required conversion to open surgery due to vascular adhesions. Postoperative complications included pancreatic fistula in 20% of cases, delayed gastric emptying in 15% of cases and major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥III) in 25% of cases. The median LOS was 10 days (IQR 8-18) for RDP and seven days (IQR 5-10) for RDSP. No 90-day mortality was observed. Conclusions: Robotic pancreatic resections are feasible and safe during the early learning curve, with morbidity comparable to open surgery. Operative efficiency improved significantly for RDP, highlighting the importance of structured training and case volume. These findings support the adoption of robotic techniques in pancreatic surgery, though further studies are needed to validate long-term outcomes.
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.