| Title |
Safety and feasibility of the robotic platform in the management of surgical sequelae of chronic pancreatitis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Surgical Endoscopy, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00464-017-6010-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ahmad Hamad, Mazen S. Zenati, Trang K. Nguyen, Melissa E. Hogg, Herbert J. Zeh, Amer H. Zureikat |
| Abstract |
The application of minimally invasive surgery to chronic pancreatitis (CP) procedures is uncommon. Our objective was to report the safety and feasibility of the robotic approach in the treatment of surgical sequelae of CP, and provide insights into the technique, tricks, and pitfalls associated with the application of robotics to this challenging disease entity. A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing robotic-assisted resections and/or drainage procedures for CP at the University of Pittsburgh between May 2009 and January 2017 was performed. A video of a robotic Frey procedure is also shown. Of 812 robotic pancreatic resections and reconstructions 39 were for CP indications. These included 11 total pancreatectomies [with and without auto islet transplantation], 8 Puestow procedures, 4 Frey procedures, 6 pancreaticoduodenectomies, and 10 distal pancreatectomies. Median age was 49, and 41% of the patients were female. The most common etiology for CP was idiopathic pancreatitis (n = 16, 46%). Median operative time was 324 min with a median estimated blood loss of 250 ml. None of the patients required conversion to laparotomy. A Clavien III-IV complication rate was experienced by 5 (13%) patients, including one reoperation. Excluding the eleven patients who underwent TP, rate of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula was 7% (Grade B = 2, Grade C = 0). No 30 or 90 day mortalities were recorded. The median length of hospital stay was 7 days. Use of the robotic platform is safe and feasible when tackling complex pancreatic resections for sequelae of chronic pancreatitis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| South Africa | 1 | 20% |
| Mexico | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 40 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 18% |
| Researcher | 5 | 13% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 14 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 53% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 14 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 January 2018.
All research outputs
#13,000,138
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#2,618
of 6,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,234
of 440,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#77
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,103 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 440,933 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.