Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41383662›Full record

ArticleHepatobiliary surgery and nutrition2025

Safety and learning curve of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy with limited robotic platform access: a propensity score-matched comparison with open surgery in a high-volume center.

Antoine Castel, Raffaele Vincenzo De Rosa, Maxime Esvan, Aude Merdrignac, Marie Livin, Edouard Wasielewski, Fabien Robin, Laurent Sulpice

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Do the simplest robotic procedures carry the highest morbidity?Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Antoine CastelHepatobiliary and Digestive Surgery Department, University Hospital of Rennes, Rennes, France.
Raffaele Vincenzo De RosaHepatobiliary and Digestive Surgery Department, University Hospital of Rennes, Rennes, France.
Maxime EsvanFrench Institute of Health and Medical Research, Inserm U1414, University Hospital of Rennes, Rennes, France.
Aude MerdrignacHepatobiliary and Digestive Surgery Department, University Hospital of Rennes, Rennes, France.
Marie LivinHepatobiliary and Digestive Surgery Department, University Hospital of Rennes, Rennes, France.
Edouard WasielewskiHepatobiliary and Digestive Surgery Department, University Hospital of Rennes, Rennes, France.
Fabien RobinHepatobiliary and Digestive Surgery Department, University Hospital of Rennes, Rennes, France.
Laurent SulpiceHepatobiliary and Digestive Surgery Department, University Hospital of Rennes, Rennes, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8817-1685

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is a major surgical procedure that is still mostly performed via open approach [open PD (OPD)] since the laparoscopic approach (LA) is limited outside specialised centers. Robot-assisted PD (RPD) appears to decrease the difficulties associated with LA. However, previously published studies are partly biased because they stem from institutions with extensive access to robotic platforms (ARPs). The present study aims to analyse the safety of RPD compared with OPD and the specific learning curve when performed with limited ARP. Methods: This prospective single-center study was conducted in a high-volume pancreatic surgery center but with limited ARP between May 2018 and October 2023. Safety (primary endpoint: 90-day mortality) was assessed using propensity score matching (2:1) to compare RPD and OPD. The learning curve was evaluated using cumulative sum (CUSUM) control chart analysis (split into three consecutive periods of 20 patients), focusing on operative time and complications. Results: A total of 354 PD were analysed, of which 60 (17%) were RPD. A matched cohort of 120 OPD was used for comparison. The conversion rate was 15% in the RPD group. The 90-day mortality rate was 5% and 8.3% for RPD and OPD, respectively (P=0.55). The RPD learning curve showed a reduction in hospital stay (19.9 Conclusions: Even with limited ARP, setting up a robotic program for PD is feasible and safe but it requires a learning curve of 40 patients. During this initial phase, careful patient selection is mandatory.

Indexed as

learning curvePancreatoduodenectomy (PD)robotic

Identifiers

PMID41383662
PMCPMC12690318

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.