Textbook outcome after robotic pancreatic enucleation: a two-center evaluation of an ideal perioperative pathway - Scorecard - MDSpire
Coming Soon: Introducing MDSpire News. Learn more
Conexiant’s news site is now MDSpire News. Learn more

Achieving Textbook Outcomes After Robotic Pancreatic Enucleation: A Two-Center Assessment of an Optimal Perioperative Pathway

  • By

  • Marionna Cathomas

  • Zheng Li

  • Benedict Kinny-Köster

  • Bo Kong

  • Ingmar Rompen

  • Elias Gauer

  • Miriam Klauß

  • Christoph W. Michalski

  • Martin Loos

  • Jin He

  • Thomas Hank

  • October 7, 2026

Share

Clinical Scorecard: Achieving Textbook Outcomes After Robotic Pancreatic Enucleation: A Two-Center Assessment of an Optimal Perioperative Pathway

At a Glance

CategoryDetail
ConditionBenign or low-grade malignant pancreatic lesions treated with robotic pancreatic enucleation (rPE).
Key MechanismsrPE aims to remove the lesion while preserving pancreatic parenchyma. The study proposed a six-component composite perioperative outcome (rPE-TO).
Target PopulationAdults aged 18 years or older who underwent completed robotic pancreatic enucleation for a pancreatic lesion at either study center.
Care SettingRetrospective two-center cohort study at Heidelberg University Hospital and Johns Hopkins University.

Key Highlights

  • The study proposed an rPE-specific textbook outcome (rPE-TO) tailored to the procedure’s therapeutic objectives.
  • Achieving rPE-TO required meeting all six criteria: no conversion to open surgery, complete resection without reoperation, no clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula, no major complication, no 30-day readmission, and survival through 90 days.
  • Major complications were defined as Clavien–Dindo grade IIIa or higher; clinically relevant pancreatic fistula was ISGPS grade B or C.
  • The proposed outcome was assessed in two independent institutional cohorts, with a combined multivariable analysis adjusted for center.
  • The supplied article excerpt does not report outcome rates or factors associated with rPE-TO failure.

Guideline-Based Recommendations

Diagnosis

  • Preoperative lesion evaluation included CT or MRI; pancreatic-head lesions also received contrast-enhanced CT to assess relationships with neighboring vessels.
  • Preoperative laboratory testing included CA 19-9 and CEA.
  • An interdisciplinary tumor board reviewed patients with neuroendocrine tumors. Radiological findings determined whether additional PET imaging or endoscopic biopsy was performed.

Management

  • The study describes rPE as a parenchyma-sparing procedure for benign and low-grade malignant lesions.

Monitoring & Follow-up

  • The rPE-TO included clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula, major complications, readmission within 30 days, and survival through 90 days.

Risks

  • Failure to meet any of the six rPE-TO components precluded achievement of the composite: no conversion to open surgery, complete resection without reoperation, no clinically relevant POPF, no major complication, no 30-day readmission, and survival through 90 days.

Patient & Prescribing Data

Adults aged 18 years or older undergoing completed rPE for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic lesions at either study center.

The study evaluates a surgical procedure and perioperative pathway; it provides no medication or prescribing data in the supplied excerpt.

Clinical Best Practices

  • The study defined major complications as Clavien–Dindo grade IIIa or higher and clinically relevant POPF as ISGPS grade B or C.
  • The study was a retrospective, two-center cohort; the supplied excerpt does not report outcome rates or factors associated with rPE-TO failure.

Related Resources & Content

Original Source(s)

Related Content