Ramia, José Manuel

Abstract Background Robotic left pancreatectomy (RLP) is increasingly adopted worldwide. Current guidelines suggest a learning curve of 21 cases, yet its impact on major morbidity and oncological quality remains uncertain. Methods A retrospective multicentre international study was undertaken across 10 centres in the UK, Spain, Germany, the USA, and Australia (2014–2025). Consecutive patients undergoing RLP were categorised into competency (first 21 cases per centre) or proficiency phase (>21). The primary outcome was major morbidity (Clavien–Dindo grade ≥ IIIa), and secondary outcome was the R1-margin rate. Mixed-effects logistic regression and risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) analyses were performed. Results 521 patients underwent RLP, including 200 (38.4%) in the competency phase and 321 (61.6%) in the proficiency phase. Median age was 63 years (IQR 54–73), and 56.4% were female. Rates of major morbidity were similar between phases (14.5% versus 14.0%, P = 0.981), as were R1 margin rates (21.6% versus 19.7%, P = 0.092). Independent predictors of major morbidity included male sex (OR 1.76, P = 0.037), preoperative pancreatitis (OR 2.23, P = 0.031), and multivisceral resection (OR 2.29, P = 0.034). Among patients with adenocarcinoma (n = 110), prolonged operative time (OR 1.39 per hour, P = 0.004) and nodal positivity (OR 2.62, P = 0.047) predicted R1 resection, while learning phase was not associated with margin status. RA-CUSUM demonstrated no excess morbidity over time in any centre. Conclusions In this first multicentre international analysis, the learning phase of RLP did not increase the risk of major morbidity or compromise oncological quality. These findings support the safe global adoption of RLP with appropriate training and case selection.

Objective: This study aims at establishing benchmark values for best achievable outcomes following open major anatomic hepatectomy for liver tumors of all dignities. Background: Outcomes after open major hepatectomies vary widely lacking reference values for comparisons among centers, indications, types of resections, and minimally invasive procedures. Methods: A standard benchmark methodology was used covering consecutive patients, who underwent open major anatomic hepatectomy from 44 high-volume liver centers from 5 continents over a 5-year period (2016–2020). Benchmark cases were low-risk non-cirrhotic patients without significant comorbidities treated in high-volume centers (≥30 major liver resections/year). Benchmark values were set at the 75th percentile of median values of all centers. Minimum follow-up period was 1 year in each patient. Results: Of 8044 patients, 2908 (36%) qualified as benchmark (low-risk) cases. Benchmark cutoffs for all indications include R0 resection ≥78%; liver failure (grade B/C) ≤10%; bile leak (grade B/C) ≤18%; complications ≥grade 3 and CCI ® ≤46% and ≤9 at 3 months, respectively. Benchmark values differed significantly between malignant and benign conditions so that reference values must be adjusted accordingly. Extended right hepatectomy (H1, 4-8 or H4-8) disclosed a higher cutoff for liver failure, while extended left (H1-5,8 or H2-5,8) were associated with higher cutoffs for bile leaks, but had superior oncologic outcomes, when compared to formal left hepatectomy (H1-4 or H2-4). The minimal follow-up for a conclusive outcome evaluation following open anatomic major resection must be 3 months. Conclusion: These new benchmark cutoffs for open major hepatectomy provide a powerful tool to convincingly evaluate other approaches including parenchymal-sparing procedures, laparoscopic/robotic approaches, and alternative treatments, such as ablation therapy, irradiation, or novel chemotherapy regimens.