{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,23]],"date-time":"2026-10-23T19:11:28Z","timestamp":1792782688898,"version":"4.5.0"},"reference-count":36,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"10","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,23]],"date-time":"2026-07-23T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1784764800000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,23]],"date-time":"2026-07-23T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1784764800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"name":"Universit\u00e0 Cattolica del Sacro Cuore","id":[{"id":"https:\/\/ror.org\/03h7r5v07","id-type":"ROR","asserted-by":"crossref"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Surg Endosc"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,10]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (R-PD) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative to open pancreatoduodenectomy (O-PD), although its role remains debated due to technical complexity and heterogeneous outcomes. This study compared perioperative outcomes between R-PD and O-PD in a high-volume center while minimizing the impact of the learning curve, and additionally evaluated the progressive improvement in surgical outcomes between the early and late phases of the robotic experience through comparative analyses and CUSUM assessment.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>A single-center propensity score\u2013matched retrospective cohort study was conducted using a prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing PD between January 2020 and December 2025. The most recent 50 consecutive R-PDs (late group, LR-PD) were compared with O-PD after 2:1 matching (matched open group, MO-PD) to balance baseline characteristics. Perioperative, postoperative, and pathological outcomes were compared, and multivariable analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of key outcomes. A subgroup analysis comparing the first 50 R-PDs (early group, ER-PD) with the subsequent 50 cases (LR-PD) was also performed, along with CUSUM analyses of outcomes showing differences between the two phases of the robotic experience.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      After matching, 100 MO-PD patients were compared with 50 LR-PD patients. LR-PD was associated with significantly lower estimated blood loss (EBL) (200 vs 300 mL;\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.0012) and shorter length of hospital stay (LOS) (12 vs 14 days;\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.038), but longer operative time (OT) (582 vs 362 minutes;\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u20090.001). Rates of major complications (Clavien\u2013Dindo\u2009\u2265\u2009III) and pancreas-specific complications were comparable between groups. A significantly lower incidence of postoperative lymphatic fistula was observed in the LR-PD (4 vs 15%;\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.045). At multivariable analysis, the LR-PD was independently associated with lower EBL (\n                      <jats:italic>\u03b2<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009\u2212\u2009116.80;\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.023), shorter LOS (\n                      <jats:italic>\u03b2<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009\u2212\u20091.48;\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.041), and a reduced risk of postoperative lymphatic fistula (OR 0.30;\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.047), while remaining an independent predictor of longer OT (\n                      <jats:italic>\u03b2<\/jats:italic>\n                      99.75;\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u20090.001). Within the R-PD, OT was significantly shorter in the LR-PD compared with the ER-PD (582 vs 705 minutes;\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u20090.001). CUSUM analyses identified inflection points at cases 51, 55, and 53 for OT, major complications, and clinically relevant PPH, respectively.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>In a high-volume setting after the learning curve, R-PD is a potentially safe and feasible alternative to O-PD, offering reduced EBL, shorter LOS, and lower incidence of lymphatic fistula, despite longer OT. Further prospective studies are warranted to confirm these findings.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1007\/s00464-026-13143-3","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,23]],"date-time":"2026-07-23T14:24:11Z","timestamp":1784816651000},"page":"8670-8686","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Robotic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy after completion of the learning curve: a propensity score\u2013matched and CUSUM analyses of perioperative outcomes"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"40","author":[{"given":"Matteo","family":"Aulicino","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-0001-9479","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Giuseppe","family":"Quero","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Claudio","family":"Fiorillo","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Roberta","family":"Menghi","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Giuseppe","family":"Daloiso","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Flavia","family":"Taglioni","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Claudia","family":"Ferrantone","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Davide","family":"De Sio","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Antonio Pio","family":"Tortorelli","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Vincenzo","family":"Tondolo","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Sergio","family":"Alfieri","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,23]]},"reference":[{"key":"13143_CR1","unstructured":"D\u2019Cruz JR, Misra S, Menon G, Shamsudeen S (2026). Pancreaticoduodenectomy (Whipple procedure). In: StatPearls. Treasure Island, FL: StatPearls Publishing"},{"key":"13143_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1605","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMra0901557","volume":"362","author":"M Hidalgo","year":"2010","unstructured":"Hidalgo M (2010) Pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med 362:1605\u20131617. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1056\/NEJMra0901557","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"key":"13143_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1199","DOI":"10.1016\/j.gassur.2006.08.018","volume":"10","author":"JM Winter","year":"2006","unstructured":"Winter JM, Cameron JL, Campbell KA, Arnold MA, Chang DC, Coleman J et al (2006) 1423 pancreaticoduodenectomies for pancreatic cancer: a single-institution experience. J Gastrointest Surg 10:1199\u20131210. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.gassur.2006.08.018. (discussion 1210-1)","journal-title":"J Gastrointest Surg"},{"key":"13143_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"530","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jamcollsurg.2014.12.031","volume":"220","author":"JL Cameron","year":"2015","unstructured":"Cameron JL, He J (2015) Two thousand consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies. J Am Coll Surg 220:530\u2013536. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jamcollsurg.2014.12.031","journal-title":"J Am Coll Surg"},{"key":"13143_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1000","DOI":"10.1002\/bjs.9468","volume":"101","author":"GA Gooiker","year":"2014","unstructured":"Gooiker GA, Lemmens VEPP, Besselink MG, Busch OR, Bonsing BA, Molenaar IQ et al (2014) Impact of centralization of pancreatic cancer surgery on resection rates and survival. Br J Surg 101:1000\u20131005. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/bjs.9468","journal-title":"Br J Surg"},{"key":"13143_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"317","DOI":"10.1016\/j.hpb.2016.01.515","volume":"18","author":"LGM van der Geest","year":"2016","unstructured":"van der Geest LGM, van Rijssen LB, Molenaar IQ, de Hingh IH, Groot Koerkamp B, Busch ORC et al (2016) Volume-outcome relationships in pancreatoduodenectomy for cancer. HPB (Oxford) 18:317\u2013324. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.hpb.2016.01.515","journal-title":"HPB (Oxford)"},{"key":"13143_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3614","DOI":"10.1245\/s10434-025-16990-x","volume":"32","author":"C Ricci","year":"2025","unstructured":"Ricci C, D\u2019Ambra V, Alberici L, Ingaldi C, Minghetti M, Bonini G et al (2025) Minimal invasive pancreatoduodenectomy: a comprehensive systematic review and metanalysis of randomized controlled clinical trials. Ann Surg Oncol 32:3614\u20133622. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1245\/s10434-025-16990-x","journal-title":"Ann Surg Oncol"},{"key":"13143_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"257","DOI":"10.1097\/SLA.0000000000001660","volume":"264","author":"T de Rooij","year":"2016","unstructured":"de Rooij T, Lu MZ, Steen MW, Gerhards MF, Dijkgraaf MG, Busch OR et al (2016) Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative cohort and registry studies. Ann Surg 264:257\u2013267. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SLA.0000000000001660","journal-title":"Ann Surg"},{"key":"13143_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/SLA.0000000000006167","author":"X-P Zhang","year":"2023","unstructured":"Zhang X-P, Xu S, Zhao Z-M, Yu G-S, Han B, Chen X et al (2023) Outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy following learning curves of surgeons: a multicenter study on 2255 patients. Ann Surg. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SLA.0000000000006167","journal-title":"Ann Surg"},{"key":"13143_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"554","DOI":"10.1097\/SLA.0b013e3182a4e87c","volume":"258","author":"AH Zureikat","year":"2013","unstructured":"Zureikat AH, Moser AJ, Boone BA, Bartlett DL, Zenati M, Zeh HJ (2013) 250 robotic pancreatic resections: safety and feasibility. Ann Surg 258:554\u2013559. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SLA.0b013e3182a4e87c. (discussion 559-62)","journal-title":"Ann Surg"},{"key":"13143_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"665","DOI":"10.1097\/SLA.0000000000005981","volume":"279","author":"F Nickel","year":"2024","unstructured":"Nickel F, Wise PA, M\u00fcller PC, Kuemmerli C, Cizmic A, Salg GA et al (2024) Short-term outcomes of robotic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy: propensity score-matched analysis. Ann Surg 279:665\u2013670. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SLA.0000000000005981","journal-title":"Ann Surg"},{"key":"13143_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e563","DOI":"10.1097\/SLA.0000000000005687","volume":"278","author":"HH Khachfe","year":"2023","unstructured":"Khachfe HH, Nassour I, Hammad AY, Hodges JC, AlMasri S, Liu H et al (2023) Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: increased adoption and improved outcomes: is laparoscopy still justified? Ann Surg 278:e563\u2013e569. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SLA.0000000000005687","journal-title":"Ann Surg"},{"key":"13143_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1646","DOI":"10.1007\/s00464-009-0825-4","volume":"24","author":"PC Giulianotti","year":"2010","unstructured":"Giulianotti PC, Sbrana F, Bianco FM, Elli EF, Shah G, Addeo P et al (2010) Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: single-surgeon experience. Surg Endosc 24:1646\u20131657. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00464-009-0825-4","journal-title":"Surg Endosc"},{"key":"13143_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"640","DOI":"10.1097\/SLA.0000000000001869","volume":"264","author":"AH Zureikat","year":"2016","unstructured":"Zureikat AH, Postlewait LM, Liu Y, Gillespie TW, Weber SM, Abbott DE et al (2016) A multi-institutional comparison of perioperative outcomes of robotic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 264:640\u2013649. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SLA.0000000000001869","journal-title":"Ann Surg"},{"key":"13143_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"428","DOI":"10.1016\/S2468-1253(24)00005-0","volume":"9","author":"Q Liu","year":"2024","unstructured":"Liu Q, Li M, Gao Y, Jiang T, Han B, Zhao G et al (2024) Effect of robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy on postoperative length of hospital stay and complications for pancreatic head or periampullary tumours: a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 9:428\u2013437. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/S2468-1253(24)00005-0","journal-title":"Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol"},{"key":"13143_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"299","DOI":"10.1159\/000445015","volume":"33","author":"N Napoli","year":"2016","unstructured":"Napoli N, Kauffmann EF, Palmeri M, Miccoli M, Costa F, Vistoli F et al (2016) The learning curve in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Dig Surg 33:299\u2013307. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1159\/000445015","journal-title":"Dig Surg"},{"key":"13143_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"4014","DOI":"10.1245\/s10434-014-3839-7","volume":"21","author":"PJ Speicher","year":"2014","unstructured":"Speicher PJ, Nussbaum DP, White RR, Zani S, Mosca PJ, Blazer DG et al (2014) Defining the learning curve for team-based laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 21:4014\u20134019. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1245\/s10434-014-3839-7","journal-title":"Ann Surg Oncol"},{"key":"13143_CR18","unstructured":"Hendrix JM, Garmon EH (2025) American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification system. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island, FL: StatPearls Publishing"},{"key":"13143_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0112479","volume":"9","author":"M Charlson","year":"2014","unstructured":"Charlson M, Wells MT, Ullman R, King F, Shmukler C (2014) The Charlson comorbidity index can be used prospectively to identify patients who will incur high future costs. PLoS ONE 9:1\u201316. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0112479","journal-title":"PLoS ONE"},{"key":"13143_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1028","DOI":"10.6004\/jnccn.2017.0131","volume":"15","author":"MA Tempero","year":"2017","unstructured":"Tempero MA, Malafa MP, Al-Hawary M, Asbun H, Bain A, Behrman SW et al (2017) Pancreatic adenocarcinoma, version 2.2017, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 15:1028\u20131061. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.6004\/jnccn.2017.0131","journal-title":"J Natl Compr Canc Netw"},{"key":"13143_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jamcollsurg.2012.09.002","volume":"216","author":"MP Callery","year":"2013","unstructured":"Callery MP, Pratt WB, Kent TS, Chaikof EL, Vollmer CM (2013) A prospectively validated clinical risk score accurately predicts pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg 216:1\u201314. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jamcollsurg.2012.09.002","journal-title":"J Am Coll Surg"},{"key":"13143_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"187","DOI":"10.1097\/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2","volume":"250","author":"PA Clavien","year":"2009","unstructured":"Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD et al (2009) The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg 250:187\u2013196. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2","journal-title":"Ann Surg"},{"key":"13143_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"584","DOI":"10.1016\/j.surg.2016.11.014","volume":"161","author":"C Bassi","year":"2016","unstructured":"Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, Sarr M, Abu Hilal M, Adham M et al (2016) The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery 161:584\u2013591. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.surg.2016.11.014","journal-title":"Surgery"},{"key":"13143_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"761","DOI":"10.1016\/j.surg.2007.05.005","volume":"142","author":"MN Wente","year":"2007","unstructured":"Wente MN, Bassi C, Dervenis C, Fingerhut A, Gouma DJ, Izbicki JR et al (2007) Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Surgery 142:761\u2013768. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.surg.2007.05.005","journal-title":"Surgery"},{"key":"13143_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"680","DOI":"10.1016\/j.surg.2010.12.002","volume":"149","author":"M Koch","year":"2011","unstructured":"Koch M, Garden OJ, Padbury R, Rahbari NN, Adam R, Capussotti L et al (2011) Bile leakage after hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a definition and grading of severity by the International Study Group of Liver Surgery. Surgery 149:680\u2013688. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.surg.2010.12.002","journal-title":"Surgery"},{"key":"13143_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"20","DOI":"10.1016\/j.surg.2007.02.001","volume":"142","author":"MN Wente","year":"2007","unstructured":"Wente MN, Veit JA, Bassi C, Dervenis C, Fingerhut A, Gouma DJ et al (2007) Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH): an International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. Surgery 142:20\u201325. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.surg.2007.02.001","journal-title":"Surgery"},{"key":"13143_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"902","DOI":"10.1111\/his.14540","volume":"79","author":"C Verbeke","year":"2021","unstructured":"Verbeke C, Webster F, Brosens L, Campbell F, Del Chiaro M, Esposito I et al (2021) Dataset for the reporting of carcinoma of the exocrine pancreas: recommendations from the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR). Histopathology 79:902\u2013912. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/his.14540","journal-title":"Histopathology"},{"key":"13143_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/AS9.0000000000000111","volume":"3","author":"PC M\u00fcller","year":"2022","unstructured":"M\u00fcller PC, Kuemmerli C, Cizmic A, Sinz S, Probst P, de Santibanes M et al (2022) Learning curves in open, laparoscopic, and robotic pancreatic surgery: a systematic review and proposal of a standardization. Ann Surg Open 3:e111. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/AS9.0000000000000111","journal-title":"Ann Surg Open"},{"key":"13143_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"45","DOI":"10.1097\/SLA.0000000000006006","volume":"279","author":"M Abu Hilal","year":"2024","unstructured":"Abu Hilal M, van Ramshorst TME, Boggi U, Dokmak S, Edwin B, Keck T et al (2024) The Brescia internationally validated European guidelines on minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (EGUMIPS). Ann Surg 279:45\u201357. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SLA.0000000000006006","journal-title":"Ann Surg"},{"key":"13143_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1933","DOI":"10.1016\/j.gassur.2024.08.013","volume":"28","author":"M Neshan","year":"2024","unstructured":"Neshan M, Padmanaban V, Chick RC, Pawlik TM (2024) Open vs robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy, cost-effectiveness and long-term oncologic outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Surg 28:1933\u20131942. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.gassur.2024.08.013","journal-title":"J Gastrointest Surg"},{"key":"13143_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s12029-025-01177-0","volume":"56","author":"MH Waseem","year":"2025","unstructured":"Waseem MH, Abideen ZU, Durrani R, Dilawar E, Kamran MS, Butt HT et al (2025) Comparing operative outcomes and resection quality in robotic vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a meta-analysis of 54,000 patients. J Gastrointest Cancer 56:57. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s12029-025-01177-0","journal-title":"J Gastrointest Cancer"},{"key":"13143_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"501","DOI":"10.1007\/s00464-019-07084-3","volume":"34","author":"Q Yan","year":"2020","unstructured":"Yan Q, Xu L-B, Ren Z-F, Liu C (2020) Robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a meta-analysis of short-term outcomes. Surg Endosc 34:501\u2013509. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00464-019-07084-3","journal-title":"Surg Endosc"},{"key":"13143_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.eclinm.2026.103761","volume":"92","author":"G Polychronidis","year":"2026","unstructured":"Polychronidis G, Joos MC, Merz DC, Holze M, Kalkum E, Probst P et al (2026) Non-inferiority of robotic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy - a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective non-randomized and randomized trials. EClinicalMedicine 92:103761. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.eclinm.2026.103761","journal-title":"EClinicalMedicine"},{"key":"13143_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.lanepe.2024.100864","volume":"39","author":"R Klotz","year":"2024","unstructured":"Klotz R, Mihaljevic AL, Kulu Y, Sander A, Klose C, Behnisch R et al (2024) Robotic versus open partial pancreatoduodenectomy (EUROPA): a randomised controlled stage 2b trial. Lancet Reg Health Eur 39:100864. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.lanepe.2024.100864","journal-title":"Lancet Reg Health Eur"},{"key":"13143_CR35","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1038\/s41598-021-83391-x","volume":"11","author":"X Da Dong","year":"2021","unstructured":"Da Dong X, Felsenreich DM, Gogna S, Rojas A, Zhang E, Dong M et al (2021) Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy provides better histopathological outcomes as compared to its open counterpart: a meta-analysis. Sci Rep 11:3774. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/s41598-021-83391-x","journal-title":"Sci Rep"},{"key":"13143_CR36","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3389\/fsurg.2022.989065","volume":"9","author":"Y Fu","year":"2022","unstructured":"Fu Y, Qiu J, Yu Y, Wu D, Zhang T (2022) Meta-analysis of robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy in all patients and pancreatic cancer patients. Front Surg 9:989065. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/fsurg.2022.989065","journal-title":"Front Surg"}],"container-title":["Surgical Endoscopy"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00464-026-13143-3.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s00464-026-13143-3","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00464-026-13143-3.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,2]],"date-time":"2026-10-02T15:13:24Z","timestamp":1790954004000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s00464-026-13143-3"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,23]]},"references-count":36,"journal-issue":{"issue":"10","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,10]]}},"alternative-id":["13143"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00464-026-13143-3","relation":{},"ISSN":["0930-2794","1432-2218"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0930-2794","type":"print"},{"value":"1432-2218","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,23]]},"assertion":[{"value":"1 April 2026","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"27 June 2026","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"23 July 2026","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"Dr. Matteo Aulicino, Dr. Giuseppe Quero, Dr. Claudio Fiorillo, Dr. Roberta Menghi, Dr. Giuseppe Dalioso, Dr. Flavia Tagliani, Dr. Claudia Ferrantone, Dr. Davide De Sio, Dr. Antonio Pio Tortorelli, Dr. Vincenzo Tondolo, and Prof. Sergio Alfieri declare that they have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.","order":1,"name":"Ethics","label":"Disclosures","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}}]}}