Robotic Versus Open Surgery Following Neoadjuvant Therapy in Pancreatic Cancer: Evaluation of Safety and Oncologic Outcomes
Status
Conditions
Details and patient eligibility
About
The feasibility and safety of minimally invasive surgery in cases after neoadjuvant therapy were unclear. It is worth exploring the safety of robotic resection for pancreatic cancer following neoadjuvant therapy. The investigators investigated the comparative outcomes of robotic and open surgery in the management of pancreatic cancer after NAT, exploring the feasibility and safety of robotic procedures in complex cases of pancreatic cancer, and providing evidence-based guidance for clinical practice.
Full description
Currently, most studies focus on upfront resectable pancreatic cancer, benign or low-grade malignant tumors, demonstrating that robotic surgery can shorten postoperative hospital stays, reduce intraoperative blood loss, and achieve oncological outcomes comparable to open surgery. The feasibility and safety of minimally invasive surgery in cases after NAT were unclear. Both the Miami international evidence-based consensus and the Brescia international validated European guidelines indicate that current data are insufficient to recommend minimally invasive approaches for pancreatic cancer resection following NAT, highlighting the need for additional research. Therefore, it is worth exploring the safety of robotic resection for pancreatic cancer following NAT.
The investigators investigated the comparative outcomes of robotic and open surgery in the management of pancreatic cancer after NAT, exploring the feasibility and safety of robotic procedures in complex cases of pancreatic cancer, and providing evidence-based guidance for clinical practice.
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
- Age over 18 years.
- Received neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
- Postoperative pathology confirmed pancreatic cancer.
- Underwent either open or robotic surgery.
Exclusion criteria
- Intraoperative discovery of unresectable tumor or presence of distant metastasis.
- ASA score ≥ 4.
Trial design
56 participants in 2 patient groups
Trial contacts and locations
Loading...
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal