ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Textbook outcomes in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a European multicenter analysis on surgical performance and success predictors.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) has emerged as a safe and feasible alternative to open surgery, extending the benefits of minimally invasive surgery to complex pancreatic procedures. However, standardized and comparable metrics to evaluate surgical quality in RPD remain limited. This study aimed to evaluate surgical and oncologic textbook outcomes (TO and TOO) and to identify predictors of success across multiple European centers.
methodsAll consecutive RPDs performed between 2010 and 2024 in six European pancreatic centers were retrospectively analyzed. Textbook outcome (TO) was defined as the absence of major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III), clinically relevant pancreatic fistula, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage or bile leak, 30-day or in-hospital mortality, and 30-day readmission. An extended composite (TO + LOS) additionally incorporated prolonged hospital stay (> 14 days). In patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), textbook oncologic outcome (TOO) included six oncologic and perioperative quality items.
resultsA total of 403 RPDs were analyzed. Overall morbidity and major complications occurred in 61% and 26% of patients, respectively. TO and TO + LOS were achieved in 63% and 52% of cases, with no significant intercountry differences among countries. Independent predictors of TO were female sex (OR 2.32, p < 0.001), neoadjuvant therapy (OR 2.85, p = 0.018), preoperative biliary drainage (OR 1.87, p = 0.012), and shorter operative time (p < 0.001). Among 247 PDAC cases, TOO was achieved in 33.6%, mainly limited by inadequate lymph node retrieval.
conclusionsRPD achieves reproducible and high-quality composite outcomes across experienced European centers. Our findings suggests that these composite measures may provide a reliable tool for quality assessment in RPD, reflecting the combined impact of patient selection and perioperative management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42301450What 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.