• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Log in
  • Search
    • Search All SAGES Content
    • Search SAGES Guidelines
    • Search the Video Library
    • Search the Image Library
    • Search the Abstracts Archive
www.sages.org

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • Search
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2026 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • MIS Fellows Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
  • Opportunities
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs and Humanitarian Efforts
  • OWLS/FLS
You are here: Home / Abstracts / Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy at a High Volume, Minimally Invasive Center

Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy at a High Volume, Minimally Invasive Center

William B Lyman, MD, Michael Passeri, MD, Amit Sastry, MD, Allyson Cochran, MSPH, David A Iannitti, MD, FACS, Dionisios Vrochides, MD, PhD, FACS, FRCSC, Erin H Baker, MD, FACS, John B Martinie, MD, FACS. Carolinas Medical Center

Background: The robotic-assisted approach to distal pancreatectomy has gained popularity over the past decade with most studies showing comparable results to those of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.  One limitation to previous studies is that the majority of sampled data is from institutions which still perform a relatively high percentage of open procedures (most well over 50%).  In this study we present a comparison of robotic-assisted and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies at a high volume center where approximately 70% of distal pancreatectomies are performed in minimally invasive fashion.

Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively recorded data from a REDCap™ database to identify all minimally invasive distal pancreatectomies from January 2008-June 2017 (n=250).  One patient was excluded for undergoing simultaneous HIPEC therapy leaving our total number of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomies at 249.  All pathologic margins were analyzed according to the Leeds Pathology Protocol (LEEPP) which results in higher rates of margin positivity than traditional neck margin evaluation.  Statistical analysis was performed using STATA® software using a combination of Wilcoxon rank-sum and Pearson’s chi-squared tests.

Results: Of the 249 minimally invasive distal pancreatectomies performed at our institution, 135 were performed laparoscopically, and 114 were performed with robotic-assistance.  Females were more likely to undergo a robotic-assisted procedure (p=0.034).  Additional demographic variables and indications for procedure were similar between groups [Table 1].  Overall, 22.9% of patients underwent distal pancreatectomy for adenocarcinoma. Splenic preservation occurred more often in the robotic-assisted group (p<0.001), and operative time was shorter in the laparoscopic group (p<0.001).  Additional outcomes were similar between groups [Table 2].  Of the 58 total patients with adenocarcinoma, a greater number of lymph nodes was evaluated in the robotic cohort (p=0.039).  Additional outcomes in patients with adenocarcinoma were similar [Table 3].

Conclusions: At a high volume minimally invasive center, robotic-assisted and laparoscopic approaches to distal pancreatectomy are reasonable for both benign and malignant disease.  While splenic preservation rate is higher in the robotic-assisted group, we are unable to retrospectively determine intention to preserve the spleen preoperatively.  While operating room time is longer in the robotic-assisted group, this may be an artifact of higher splenic preservation rates.  The greater number of average lymph nodes evaluated for adenocarcinoma in the robotic-assisted group may suggest a more thorough lymph node dissection in the robotic group.  In the hands of highly skilled minimally invasive surgeons, both approaches produce similar results with a low overall conversion rate (6.0%).


Presented at the SAGES 2017 Annual Meeting in Houston, TX.

Abstract ID: 88046

Program Number: S062

Presentation Session: Liver/Pancreas Session

Presentation Type: Podium

44

Share this:

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window) Pocket
  • Click to share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
  • Click to share on Threads (Opens in new window) Threads
  • Click to share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky

Related


sages_adbutler_leaderboard

Hours & Info

11300 West Olympic Blvd, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90064

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2025 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals