Backgrounds/aims: This study aims to describe our experience with minimally-invasive distal pancreatectomies, with emphasis on the comparison between robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP).
Methods: Retrospective review of 102 consecutive RDP and LDP from 2006 to 2019 was performed.
Results: There were 27 and 75 patients who underwent RDP and LDP, respectively. There were 12 (11.8%) open conversions and 16 (15.7%) patients had major (＞grade 2) morbidities. Patients who underwent RDP had significantly higher rates of splenic preservation (44.4% vs. 13.3%, p=0.002), higher rates of splenic-vessel preservation (40.7% vs. 9.3%, p=0.001), higher median difficulty score (5 vs. 3, p=0.002) but longer operation time (385 vs. 245 minutes, p＜0.001). The rate of open conversion tended to be lower with RDP (3.7% vs. 14.7%, p=0.175).
Conclusions: In our institution practice, both RDP and LDP were safe and effective. The use of RDP appeared to be complementary to LDP, allowing us to perform more difficult procedures with comparable postoperative outcomes.
Keywords: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy; Left pancreatectomy; Minimally-invasive distal pancreatectomy; Robotic distal pancreatectomy.