Meta-analysis of robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy in all patients and pancreatic cancer patients

PurposesTo compare perioperative outcomes of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) using evidence from cohort studies. MethodsOutcomes of interest include operative time, blood loss, R0 resection rate, lymph nodes harvested, overall complication rate, pancreatic fistula rate, delayed gastric emptying rate and 90-day mortality. Results6 prospective studies and 15 retrospective studies were included. Five of these studies were limited to patients with pancreatic cancer. Operative time was significantly longer in RPD (WMD: 64.60 min; 95% CI: 26.89 to 102.21; p = 0.001). Estimated blood loss was lower in RPD (WMD: -185.44 ml; 95% CI: -239.66 to -131.21; p < 0.001). Overall complication rates (OR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.44 to 0.97; p < 0.001) and pancreatic fistula rate (OR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.82; p < 0.001) were both lower in RPD. Length of hospital stay was longer in OPD (WMD: -1.90; 95% CI: -2.47 to -1.33). 90-day mortality was lower in RPD [odds ratio (OR): 0.77; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.95; p = 0.025]. ConclusionAt current level of evidence, RPD is a safer alternative than OPD with regard to post-operative outcomes and blood loss. However, in terms of oncological outcomes RPD show no advantage over OPD, and the cost of RPD was higher. In general, RPD is now considered a reliable technology, but high-quality randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies are still needed to support this conclusion.

Automated summary

A comparison between robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) showed that RPD is safer with better perioperative outcomes and lower blood loss. However, in terms of oncological outcomes, RPD does not have an advantage over OPD, and it is also more expensive.