Hoehn R.S. Nassour I. Adam M.A. et al.

National Trends in Robotic Pancreas Surgery.

J Gastrointest Surg. 25: 983-990Stewart C.L. Ituarte P.H.G. Melstrom K.A. et al.

Robotic surgery trends in general surgical oncology from the National Inpatient Sample.

Surg Endosc. 33: 2591-2601de Rooij T. van Hilst J. van Santvoort H. et al.

Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy (LEOPARD): a multicenter patient-blinded randomized controlled trial.

Ann Surg. 269: 2-9Palanivelu C. Senthilnathan P. Sabnis S.C. et al.

Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for periampullary tumours.

Br J Surg. 104: 1443-1450Poves I. Burdío F. Morató O. et al.

Comparison of perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open approach for pancreatoduodenectomy: the padulap randomized controlled trial.

Ann Surg. 268: 731-739van Hilst J. de Rooij T. Bosscha K. et al.

Laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic or periampullary tumours (LEOPARD-2): a multicentre, patient-blinded, randomised controlled phase 2/3 trial.

Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 4: 199-207Kim J. Hwang H.K. Lee W.J. et al.

Minimally invasive vs open pancreatectomy for nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

World J Gastrointest Oncol. 12: 1133-1145Zhang X.-F. Lopez-Aguiar A.G. Poultsides G. et al.

Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: an analysis from the U.S. neuroendocrine tumor study group.

J Surg Oncol. 120: 231-240Ferraro V. Tedeschi M. Laera L. et al.

The role of laparoscopic surgery in localized pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours.

Curr Treat Options Oncol. 22: 27de Rooij T. van Hilst J. Topal B. et al.

Outcomes of a multicenter training program in laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LAELAPS-2).

Ann Surg. 269: 344-350de Rooij T. van Hilst J. Boerma D. et al.

Impact of a nationwide training program in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (LAELAPS).

Ann Surg. 264: 754-762Zwart M.J.W. Nota C.L.M. de Rooij T. et al.

Outcomes of a multicenter training program in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (LAELAPS-3).

Ann Surg. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000004783Stocchi L. Nelson H. Sargent D.J. et al.

Impact of surgical and pathologic variables in rectal cancer: a United States community and cooperative group report.

J Clin Oncol. 19: 3895-3902Katz M.H.G. Merchant N.B. Brower S. et al.

Standardization of surgical and pathologic variables is needed in multicenter trials of adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer: results from the ACOSOG Z5031 trial.

Ann Surg Oncol. 18: 337-344Ikoma N. Kim M.P. Tzeng C.-W.D. et al.

External retraction technique for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy.

J Am Coll Surg. 231: e8-e10

U.S. Food & Drug Administration website, Caution when using robotically-assisted surgical devices in women's health including mastectomy and other cancer-related surgeries: FDA safety communication. Access URL: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/safety-communications/update-caution-robotically-assisted-surgical-devices-mastectomy-fda-safety-communication, 2021, FDA.

Braga M. Pecorelli N. Ferrari D. et al.

Results of 100 consecutive laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies: postoperative outcome, cost-benefit analysis, and quality of life assessment.

Surg Endosc. 29: 1871-1878Zureikat A.H. Beane J.D. Zenati M.S. et al.

500 Minimally invasive robotic pancreatoduodenectomies: one decade of optimizing performance.

Ann Surg. 273: 966-972Song K.B. Kim S.C. Park J.B. et al.

Single-center experience of laparoscopic left pancreatic resection in 359 consecutive patients: changing the surgical paradigm of left pancreatic resection.

Surg Endosc. 25: 3364-3372Asbun H.J. Moekotte A.L. Vissers F.L. et al.

The miami international evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection.

Ann Surg. 271: 1-14Gianotti L. Besselink M.G. Sandini M. et al.

Nutritional support and therapy in pancreatic surgery: a position paper of the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS).

Surgery. 164: 1035-1048Lambert J.E. Hayes L.D. Keegan T.J. et al.

The impact of prehabilitation on patient outcomes in hepatobiliary, colorectal, and upper gastrointestinal cancer surgery: a PRISMA-accordant meta-analysis.

Ann Surg. 274: 70-77de Rooij T. Besselink M.G. Shamali A. et al.

Pan-European survey on the implementation of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery with emphasis on cancer.

HPB. 18: 170-176Jayaraman S. Gonen M. Brennan M.F. et al.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: evolution of a technique at a single institution.

J Am Coll Surgeons. 211: 503-509Klompmaker S. Zoggel D van Watkins A.A. et al.

Nationwide evaluation of patient selection for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy using american college of surgeons’ national quality improvement program.

Ann Surg. 266: 1055-1061Scheib S.A. Tanner E. Green I.C. et al.

Laparoscopy in the morbidly obese: physiologic considerations and surgical techniques to optimize success.

J Minimally Invasive Gynecol. 21: 182-195van Wissen J. Bakker N. Doodeman H.J. et al.

Preoperative methods to reduce liver volume in bariatric surgery: a systematic review.

Obes Surg. 26: 251-256Kim J.H. Gonzalez-Heredia R. Daskalaki D. et al.

Totally replaced right hepatic artery in pancreaticoduodenectomy: is this anatomical condition a contraindication to minimally invasive surgery?.

HPB. 18: 580-585Alsfasser G. Leicht H. Günster C. et al.

Volume-outcome relationship in pancreatic surgery.

Br J Surg. 103: 136-143Birkmeyer J.D. Siewers A.E. Finlayson E.V.A. et al.

Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States.

N Engl J Med. 346: 1128-1137Busweiler L.A.D. Dikken J.L. Henneman D. et al.

The influence of a composite hospital volume on outcomes for gastric cancer surgery: a Dutch population-based study.

J Surg Oncol. 115: 738-745Wang M. Meng L. Cai Y. et al.

Learning curve for laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a CUSUM analysis.

J Gastrointest Surg. 20: 924-935Kim S. Yoon Y.-S. Han H.-S. et al.

Evaluation of a single surgeon’s learning curve of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: risk-adjusted cumulative summation analysis.

Surg Endosc. 35: 2870-2878Haney C.M. Karadza E. Limen E.F. et al.

Training and learning curves in minimally invasive pancreatic surgery: from simulation to mastery.

J Pancreatology. 3: 101-110Boone B.A. Zenati M. Hogg M.E. et al.

Assessment of quality outcomes for robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: identification of the learning curve.

JAMA Surg. 150: 416-422Mark Knab L. Zenati M.S. Khodakov A. et al.

Evolution of a novel robotic training curriculum in a complex general surgical oncology fellowship.

Ann Surg Oncol. 25: 3445-3452Hogg M.E. Tam V. Zenati M. et al.

Mastery-based virtual reality robotic simulation curriculum: the first step toward operative robotic proficiency.

J Surg Educ. 74: 477-485Tam V. Zenati M. Novak S. et al.

Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy biotissue curriculum has validity and improves technical performance for surgical oncology fellows.

J Surg Educ. 74: 1057-1065Harris B.R. Musgrove K.A. Hogg M.E. et al.

Formal robotic training reduces the learning curve of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy.

HPB. 22: S132Chan K.S. Wang Z.K. Syn N. et al.

Learning curve of laparoscopic and robotic pancreas resections: a systematic review.

Surgery. 170: 194-206Shakir M. Boone B.A. Polanco P.M. et al.

The learning curve for robotic distal pancreatectomy: an analysis of outcomes of the first 100 consecutive cases at a high-volume pancreatic centre.

HPB (Oxford). 17: 580-586Partelli S. Andreasi V. Rancoita P.M.V. et al.

Outcomes after distal pancreatectomy for neuroendocrine neoplasms: a retrospective comparison between minimally invasive and open approach using propensity score weighting.

Surg Endosc. 35: 165-173van Hilst J. de Rooij T. Klompmaker S. et al.

Minimally Invasive versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy for Ductal Adenocarcinoma (DIPLOMA): A Pan-European Propensity Score Matched Study.

Ann Surg. 269: 10-17Tran Cao H.S. Lopez N. Chang D.C. et al.

Improved Perioperative Outcomes With Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy: Results From a Population-Based Analysis.

JAMA Surg. 149: 237-243Riviere D. Gurusamy K.S. Kooby D.A. et al.

Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 4: CD011391Yang D.-J. Xiong J.-J. Lu H.-M. et al.

The oncological safety in minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Sci Rep. 9: 1159Korrel M. Roelofs A. van Hilst J. et al.

Long-Term Quality of Life after Minimally Invasive vs Open Distal Pancreatectomy in the LEOPARD Randomized Trial.

J Am Coll Surg. 233: 730-739.e9Björnsson B. Sandström P. Larsson A.L. et al.

Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy (LAPOP): study protocol for a single center, nonblinded, randomized controlled trial.

Trials. 20: 356Björnsson B. Larsson A.L. Hjalmarsson C. et al.

Comparison of the duration of hospital stay after laparoscopic or open distal pancreatectomy: randomized controlled trial.

Br J Surg. 107: 1281-1288van Hilst J. Korrel M. Lof S. et al.

Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (DIPLOMA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Trials. 22: 608

Multicenter Prospective Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial for Comparison Between Laparoscopic and Open Distal Pancreatectomy for Ductal Adenocarcinoma of the Pancreatic Body and Tail. clinicaltrials.gov; 2019. Access URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/sho the Pancreatic Body and Tail. clinicaltrials.gov; 2019. Access URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03957135.

Probst P. Schuh F. Dörr-Harim C. et al.

Protocol for a randomised controlled trial to compare postoperative complications between minimally invasive and open DIStal PAnCreaTectomy (DISPACT-2 trial).

BMJ Open. 11: e047867Kamarajah S.K. Sutandi N. Robinson S.R. et al.

Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

HPB (Oxford). 21: 1107-1118Guerrini G.P. Lauretta A. Belluco C. et al.

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: an up-to-date meta-analysis.

BMC Surg. 17: 105Hong S. Song K.B. Madkhali A.A. et al.

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for left-sided pancreatic tumors: a single surgeon’s experience of 228 consecutive cases.

Surg Endosc. 34: 2465-2473Alfieri S. Butturini G. Boggi U. et al.

Short-term and long-term outcomes after robot-assisted versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs): a multicenter comparative study.

Langenbecks Arch Surg. 404: 459-468Yang J.D. Ishikawa K. Hwang H.P. et al.

Retropancreatic fascia is absent along the pancreas facing the superior mesenteric artery: a histological study using elderly donated cadavers.

Surg Radiol Anat. 35: 403-410Newton A.D. Newhook T.E. Bruno M.L. et al.

Iterative Changes in Risk-Stratified Pancreatectomy Clinical Pathways and Accelerated Discharge After Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

J Gastrointest Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-021-05235-3Cameron J.L. Riall T.S. Coleman J. et al.

One thousand consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies.

Ann Surg. 244: 10-15Chen K. Pan Y. Liu X.-L. et al.

Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary disease: a comprehensive review of literature and meta-analysis of outcomes compared with open surgery.

BMC Gastroenterol. 17: 120Wang S. Shi N. You L. et al.

Minimally invasive surgical approach versus open procedure for pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Medicine (Baltimore). 96: e8619Torphy R.J. Friedman C. Halpern A. et al.

Comparing short-term and oncologic outcomes of minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy across low and high volume centers.

Ann Surg. 270: 1147-1155Nassour I. Wang S.C. Porembka M.R. et al.

Robotic versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a NSQIP analysis.

J Gastrointest Surg. 21: 1784-1792Nassour I. Choti M.A. Porembka M.R. et al.

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: oncological outcomes.

Surg Endosc. 32: 2907-2913Zureikat A.H. Postlewait L.M. Liu Y. et al.

a multi-institutional comparison of perioperative outcomes of robotic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Ann Surg. 264: 640-649Nassour I. Tohme S. Hoehn R. et al.

Safety and oncologic efficacy of robotic compared to open pancreaticoduodenectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer.

Surg Endosc. 35: 2248-2254

Robotic versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy for Pancreatic and Periampullary Tumors (PORTAL): a study protocol for a multicenter phase III non-inferiority randomized controlled trial | Trials | Full Text.

() ()Nagakawa Y. Takishita C. Hijikata Y. et al.

Blumgart method using LAPRA-TY clips facilitates pancreaticojejunostomy in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Medicine (Baltimore). 99: e19474Hüttner F.J. Koessler-Ebs J. Hackert T. et al.

Meta-analysis of surgical outcome after enucleation versus standard resection for pancreatic neoplasms.

Br J Surg. 102: 1026-1036Di Benedetto F. Magistri P. Ballarin R. et al.

Ultrasound-guided robotic enucleation of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Surg Innov. 26: 37-45Tian F. Hong X.-F. Wu W.-M. et al.

Propensity score-matched analysis of robotic versus open surgical enucleation for small pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours.

Br J Surg. 103: 1358-1364Pitt S.C. Pitt H.A. Baker M.S. et al.

Small pancreatic and periampullary neuroendocrine tumors: resect or enucleate?.

J Gastrointest Surg. 13: 1692-1698