Sricharan Chalikonda

Novel Robotic da Vinci Instruments for Laparoendoscopic Single-site Surgery

OBJECTIVES To describe novel robotic laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (R-LESS) instruments, and present the initial laboratory experience in urology. METHODS The VeSPA surgical instruments (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) were designed to be used with the DaVinci Si surgical system. A multichannel port and curved cannulae were inserted through a single 3.5-cm umbilical incision. The port allowed 1 scope, 2 robotic instruments, and a 5- to 12-mm assistant instrument. Four pyeloplasties (right 2, left 2), 4 partial nephrectomies (right 2, left 2), and 8 nephrectomies (right 4, left 4) were performed in 4 female farm pigs (mean weight, 34.5 kg). Technical feasibility and efficiency were assessed in addition to perioperative outcomes. RESULTS All 16 R-LESS procedures were performed successfully without the addition of laparoscopic ports or open conversion. Mean total operative time was 110 minutes (range, 82-127), and mean blood loss was 20 mL (range, 10-100). Mean warm ischemia time for partial nephrectomy was 14.8 minutes (range, 12-20). There were no intraoperative complications. No robotic system failures occurred, and robotic instrument clashing was found to be minimal. One needle driver malfunctioned and assistant movement was limited. CONCLUSIONS R-LESS kidney surgery using the VeSPA instruments is feasible and efficient in the porcine model. The system offers a wide range of motion, instrument and scope stability, improved ergonomics, and minimal instrument clashing. Although preliminary experience is encouraging, further refinements are expected to optimize urological applications of this robotic technology.

Treatment of 200 locally advanced (stage III) pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients with irreversible electroporation: safety and efficacy.

OBJECTIVES Ablative therapies have been increasingly utilized in the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is an energy delivery system, effective in ablating tumors by inducing irreversible membrane destruction of cells. We aimed to demonstrate efficacy of treatment with IRE as part of multimodal treatment of LAPC. METHODS From July 2010 to October 2014, patients with radiographic stage III LAPC were treated with IRE and monitored under a multicenter, prospective institutional review board-approved registry. Perioperative 90-day outcomes, local failure, and overall survival were recorded. RESULTS A total of 200 patients with LAPC underwent IRE alone (n = 150) or pancreatic resection plus IRE for margin enhancement (n = 50). All patients underwent induction chemotherapy, and 52% received chemoradiation therapy as well for a median of 6 months (range, 5-13 months) before IRE. IRE was successfully performed in all patients. Thirty-seven percent of patients sustained complications, with a median grade of 2 (range, 1-5). Median length of stay was 6 days (range, 4-36 days). With a median follow-up of 29 months, 6 patients (3%) have experienced local recurrence. Median overall survival was 24.9 months (range: 4.9-85 months). CONCLUSIONS For patients with LAPC (stage III), the addition of IRE to conventional chemotherapy and radiation therapy results in substantially prolonged survival compared with historical controls. These results suggest that ablative control of the primary tumor may prolong survival.

Robotic versus laparoscopic resection of liver tumours

BACKGROUND There are scant data in the literature regarding the role of robotic liver surgery. The aim of the present study was to develop techniques for robotic liver tumour resection and to draw a comparison with laparoscopic resection. METHODS Over a 1-year period, nine patients underwent robotic resection of peripherally located malignant lesions measuring <5 cm. These patients were compared prospectively with 23 patients who underwent laparoscopic resection of similar tumours at the same institution. Statistical analyses were performed using Students t-test, χ(2) -test and Kaplan-Meier survival. All data are expressed as mean ± SEM. RESULTS The groups were similar with regards to age, gender and tumour type (P= NS). Tumour size was similar in both groups (robotic -3.2 ± 1.3 cm vs. laparoscopic -2.9 ± 1.3 cm, P= 0.6). Skin-to-skin operative time was 259 ± 28 min in the robotic vs. 234 ± 17 min in the laparoscopic group (P= 0.4). There was no difference between the two groups regarding estimated blood loss (EBL) and resection margin status. Conversion to an open operation was only necessary in one patient in the robotic group. Complications were observed in one patient in the robotic and four patients in the laparoscopic groups. The patients were followed up for a mean of 14 months and disease-free survival (DFS) was equivalent in both groups (P= 0.6). CONCLUSION The results of this initial study suggest that, for selected liver lesions, a robotic approach provides similar peri-operative outcomes compared with laparoscopic liver resection (LLR).

Technical Aspects of Robotic-Assisted Pancreaticoduodenectomy (RAPD)

Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenctomy (MIPD) is a technically challenging procedure. Current laparoscopic equipment with its limited range of motion, poor surgeon ergonomics, and lack of 3D view has limited the addition of MIPD. The robotic platform is able to overcome these limitations, allowing the recreation of time-honored open surgical principles of this procedure through a minimally invasive approach. We present here the technical aspects of the University of Pittsburgh robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenctomy.

A multi-institutional comparison of perioperative outcomes of robotic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy

Objectives: Limited data exist comparing robotic and open approaches to pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). We performed a multicenter comparison of perioperative outcomes of robotic PD (RPD) and open PD (OPD). Methods: Perioperative data for patients who underwent postlearning curve PD at 8 centers (8/2011–1/2015) were assessed. Univariate analyses of clinicopathologic and treatment factors were performed, and multivariable models were constructed to determine associations of operative approach (RPD or OPD) with perioperative outcomes. Results: Of the 1028 patients, 211 (20.5%) underwent RPD (4.7% conversions) and 817 (79.5%) underwent OPD. As compared with OPD, RPD patients had higher body mass index, rates of prior abdominal surgery, and softer pancreatic remnants, whereas OPD patients had a higher percentage of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma cases, and greater proportion of nondilated (<3 mm) pancreatic ducts. On multivariable analysis, as compared with OPD, RPD was associated with longer operative times [mean difference = 75.4 minutes, 95% confidence interval (CI) 17.5–133.3, P = 0.01], reduced blood loss (mean difference = −181 mL, 95% CI −355–(−7.7), P = 0.04) and reductions in major complications (odds ratio = 0.64, 95% CI 0.47–0.85, P = 0.003). No associations were demonstrated between operative approach and 90-day mortality, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula and wound infection, length of stay, or 90-day readmission. In the subset of 522 (51%) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas, operative approach was not a significant independent predictor of margin status or suboptimal lymphadenectomy (<12 lymph nodes harvested). Conclusions: Postlearning curve RPD can be performed with similar perioperative outcomes achieved with OPD. Further studies of cost, quality of life, and long-term oncologic outcomes are needed.

Single-port surgery: laboratory experience with the daVinci single-site platform.

This animal study demonstrates that single-port robotic surgery using the VeSPA platform can allow the performance of technically challenging procedures within acceptable operative times and without complications or insertion of additional trocars.

Robotic Ileal Ureter: A Completely Intracorporeal Technique

INTRODUCTION The first laparoscopic case of ileal interposition was reported in 2000, proving the feasibility of the procedure in a minimally invasive fashion by duplicating the principles of open surgery. Robotic applications in urology are expanding worldwide, given the unique features of the robotic platform, which facilitates more advanced laparoscopic procedures. In this study, we report a case of completely intracorporeal robotic ileal ureter and thoroughly describe our technique for this complex minimally invasive procedure. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS A 50-year-old gentleman with a history of right renal stones underwent multiple right ureteroscopies and thereafter developed 2 proximal ureteral strictures of 5 mm. Preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate was 71 mL/min/1.73 m(2). Renal scan showed preserved function. The treatment options were discussed, and the patient elected to undergo a robotic ileal ureter interposition. Total operative time was 7 hours, the estimated blood loss was approximately 50 mL, and the patient progressed to regular diet on postoperative day 4 without any problem, being discharged without complications. On the postoperative day 12, a cystogram demonstrated no extravasation, and the Foley catheter was removed. After 1 month, renal scan showed the left kidney with 60.1% and the right kidney with 39.9% of total renal function. At 2 years follow-up, his serum creatinine was 1.14 and estimated glomerular filtration rate was 70 mL/min/1.73 m(2). CONCLUSION Robot-assisted laparaoscopic ileal ureter with a completely intracorporeal technique is feasible and appears to be safe. A larger number of procedures using this technique and longer follow-up are needed to further define its role in the treatment of ureteral strictures.

Pancreatic cyst aspiration analysis for cystic neoplasms: Mucin or carcinoembryonic antigen—Which is better?

BACKGROUND Differentiation between the various pathologies presenting as a cystic pancreatic lesion is clinically important but often challenging. We have previously advocated the performance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with aspiration and determination of mucin and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) content. We sought to report the results of this ongoing protocol and determine the relative importance of cyst fluid mucin and CEA for the diagnostic process. METHODS The institutions prospectively maintained pancreatic cyst database was accessed to identify patients who had undergone pancreatic EUS and cyst aspiration as part of their evaluation. Only those patients who had subsequently undergone resection were selected, with histopathology being the gold standard for comparison. RESULTS From January 2000 to July 2009, 174 patients with pancreatic cystic disease underwent surgery, 121 of whom had an EUS with aspiration attempted at our institution with specimens sent for mucin and CEA. Based on histopathology, 86 mucinous lesions were identified, including 44 cystadenomas, 34 intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms, 7 mucinous adenocarcinomas, and 1 intraductal oncocytic papillary neoplasm; 42 were nonmucinous lesions. The median cyst CEA levels were significantly higher in the mucinous lesions group at 850 versus 2 ng/mL (P = .001). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive diagnostic likelihood ratio, and negative diagnostic likelihood ratio (NDLR) were calculated respectively for mucin alone (0.80, 0.40, 0.61, 0.63, 1.33, 0.68); CEA alone (0.93, 0.43, 0.51, 0.91, 1.63, 0.16); cytology alone (0.38, 0.9, 0.92, 0.31, 3.67, 0.69); mucin or CEA (0.83, 0.65, 0.87, 0.57, 2.51, 0.26); mucin or CEA or cytology (0.92, 0.52, 0.86, 0.68, 1.91, 0.15); mucin plus CEA (0.96, 0.34, 0.25, 0.97, 1.45, 0.12); mucin plus cytology (0.25, 0.97, 0.96, 0.29,7.25, 0.78); CEA plus cytology (0.12, 1.00, 1.00, 0.26, ∞, 0.88); and mucin plus CEA plus cytology (0.08, 1.00, 1.00, 0.25, ∞, 0.92). CONCLUSION Assessment of cyst mucin and CEA are complementary, with the best profile obtained when both markers are determined along with cytology. This combination provides a good sensitivity, PPV, and NDLR, as well as reasonable PPV and PDNR.

Robotic surgery of the pancreas

Pancreatic surgery is one of the most challenging and complex fields in general surgery. While minimally invasive surgery has become the standard of care for many intra-abdominal pathologies the overwhelming majority of pancreatic surgery is performed in an open fashion. This is attributed to the retroperitoneal location of the pancreas, its intimate relationship to major vasculature and the complexity of reconstruction in the case of pancreatoduodenectomy. Herein, we describe the application of robotic technology to minimally invasive pancreatic surgery. The unique capabilities of the robotic platform have made the minimally invasive approach feasible and safe with equivalent if not better outcomes (e.g., decreased length of stay, less surgical site infections) to conventional open surgery. However, it is unclear whether the robotic approach is truly superior to traditional laparoscopy; this is a key point given the substantial costs associated with procuring and maintaining robotic capabilities.

Predicting early mortality in resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A cohort study

Survival after surgical resection for pancreatic cancer remains poor. A subgroup of patients die early (<6 months), and understanding factors associated with early mortality may help to identify high‐risk patients. The Khorana score has been shown to be associated with early mortality for patients with solid tumors. In the current study, the authors evaluated the role of this score and other prognostic variables in this setting.