ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Textbook outcome after robotic pancreatic enucleation: a two-center evaluation of an ideal perioperative pathway.
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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRobotic pancreatic enucleation (rPE) has emerged as a parenchyma-sparing surgical approach for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic lesions. However, standardized metrics to assess perioperative quality are lacking. This study aimed to propose an rPE-specific textbook outcome (rPE-TO) reflecting an ideal perioperative pathway and to evaluate its applicability in two independent institutional cohorts. MATERIAL AND
methodsPatients undergoing completed rPE at University Hospital Heidelberg, Germany, between April 2023 and March 2025 were analyzed, and the proposed rPE-TO was additionally evaluated in an independent institutional cohort from Johns Hopkins University, Maryland, USA. The rPE-TO comprised six components: no conversion to open surgery, no incomplete resection requiring reoperation, no clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), no major complications (Clavien-Dindo < IIIa, with POPF assessed separately), no readmission within 30 days, and no mortality within 90 days.
resultsThe Heidelberg cohort included 31 patients, of whom 20 (64.5%) achieved rPE-TO. Among the individual components, conversion to open surgery occurred in 4 patients (12.9%), incomplete resection requiring reoperation in 1 (3.2%), POPF in 6 (19.4%), major complications in 2 (6.5%), and 30-day readmission in 2 (6.5%); no 90-day mortality occurred. In the Johns Hopkins cohort (n = 48), rPE-TO was achieved in 29 patients (60.4%). Despite comparable overall rPE-TO rates, the distribution of individual failure components differed between institutions. In addition, length of hospital stay was shorter among patients achieving rPE-TO in both cohorts.
conclusionTextbook outcome was achieved in approximately two thirds of patients undergoing rPE in both institutional cohorts. The proposed rPE-TO integrates established perioperative quality measures with procedure-specific outcomes and may provide a composite measure for assessing an ideal perioperative pathway after robotic pancreatic enucleation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42844370What 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.