Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: A meta-analysis of short-term outcomes

Jia-Yu Zhou, MD¹, Yi-Ping Mou, MD, FACS², Xiao-Wu Xu, MD², Yu-Cheng Zhou, MS², Chao Lu, MS¹, Rong-Gao Chen, MS¹. ¹Zhejiang University, ²Zhejiang Provincial People Hospital

AIM: To compare the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RADP) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP).

METHODS: A literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library database up to June 30, 2015 was performed. The following key words were used: pancreas, distal pancreatectomy, pancreatic, laparoscopic, laparoscopy, robotic, and robotic-assisted. Fixed and random effects models were applied. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS: Seven non-randomized controlled trials involving 568 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with LDP, RADP was associated with longer operating time, lower estimated blood loss, a higher spleen-preservation rate, and shorter hospital stay. There was no significant difference in transfusion, conversion to open surgery, overall complications, severe complications, pancreatic fistula, severe pancreatic fistula, ICU stay, total cost, and 30-day mortality between the two groups.

CONCLUSION: RADP is a safe and feasible alternative to LDP with regard to short-term outcomes. Further studies on the long-term outcomes of these surgical techniques are required.