Robotic bariatric surgery for the obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Costs of robotic and laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bariatric surgery is currently the most effective approach to addressing severe obesity and reducing related health issues. Laparoscopy remains the standard technique, whereas robotic-assisted surgery is increasingly adopted, although its role in bariatric surgery remains debated. The main criticism concerns its higher costs and the lack of evidence demonstrating improved clinical outcomes compared to other treatment methods. We aimed to compare the costs of robotic-assisted and laparoscopic bariatric surgery through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Following PRISMA reporting guidelines, a literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for studies comparing robotic-assisted and laparoscopic bariatric surgery. The primary outcome was total hospital costs, with bias assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. Effect sizes were calculated with 95% confidence intervals, and an overall effect was estimated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 14 retrospective studies (293 articles screened) were included, with 1,414,357 patients (112,363 robotic; 1,301,994 laparoscopic). Total hospital costs favored laparoscopic surgery (SMD 0.721, 95%CI: 0.555-0.887, p < 0.001, absolute difference USD 3819). Operating room costs also favored laparoscopy (SMD 1.339, 95%CI 0.202-2.476, p = 0.021, absolute difference: USD 9746). Laparoscopy was associated with shorter operative time, while robotic surgery showed a slight advantage in hospital stay and complication rates. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were consistent with the main findings. The quality of evidence was rated as low due to potential biases.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review and meta-analysis provides the most current and robust evidence indicating that the robotic-assisted approach incurs significantly higher costs than the laparoscopic approach in bariatric surgery. This finding remained consistent across the overall analysis as well as in nearly all subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to accurately evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the robotic approach in both primary and revisional bariatric procedures.

Robotic metabolic and bariatric surgery in community vs. academic centers in USA: a bibliometric analysis on behalf of TROGSS - The Robotic Global Surgical Society

Robotic metabolic and bariatric surgery (RMBS) has emerged as the most effective approach in the treatment of severe obesity in academic medical centers (AMCs) and community medical centers (CMCs) in the United States of America (USA). However, differences in their scientific productivity in their fields remain unexplored. This bibliometric analysis evaluates the differences in the scientific production related to RMBS in AMC vs. CMC in the USA from the point of view of bibliometric analysis. In the core collection of the Web of Science database, the research technique used in this bibliometric analysis includes specific keywords for “robotic” and “bariatric surgery”. Original articles released up until 2023 were included. A total of 89 articles were included in the study, with 73 originating from AMC and 16 from CMC. Compared with CMC, AMC had a higher average number of articles per year (3.48 vs. 1.1, P = 0.002) and a higher annual growth rate (13.23% vs. 7.6%). However, in terms of scientific impact, there was no difference in the average citations per article (22.73 ± 32.96 vs. 12.25 ± 9.59, P = 0.213) or the proportion of articles published in the highest quality scientific journals (54.8 vs. 56.3, P = 0.916). The scientific output of RMBS increased by 14.5% annually, showing a rising linear trend in AMC and an unclear trend in CMC. The University of Illinois was the most frequent AMC, while the Orlando Health network was the most common CMC. Both CMC and AMC play a pivotal role in the scientific production related to RMBS in the USA, with academic centers having a higher scientific production, but with similar scientific impact to the field at this time.

Does robotic assisted surgery mitigate obesity related systemic inflammatory response and clinical outcomes in left sided colorectal cancer resections?

Obesity (BMI > 30 kg/m2) is rapidly increasing worldwide with 26% of the UK population being obese and 38% being overweight. Obesity is intimately related to several life-limiting conditions including colorectal cancer (CRC). Obese patients have a higher degree of perioperative systemic inflammatory response (SIR) and an increased risk of perioperative complications. The aim of this current study was to investigate whether robotic-assisted surgery mitigates the effects of obesity in left sided CRC resections on the SIR and clinical outcomes. All patients undergoing left-sided colorectal cancer resections from May 2021 to May 2023 were, prospectively, entered into a database with patient characteristics and perioperative short-term outcomes recorded. CRP was considered a surrogate for SIR. The relationship between obesity and complications were examined using Chi Square for linear association, Kruskal-Wallis for continuous data and multivariate binary logistic regression model. 221 patients who underwent RAS for left-sided CRC were analysed. Obesity was associated with more comorbidity (ASA, p < 0.01) and SSI (p < 0.05) but not with age, sex, procedure or pathology. POD3 CRP < 150 mg/l was also associated with obesity (p < 0.01). In turn, greater comorbidity was associated with age (p < 0.001), site of resection (p < 0.05), SSI (p < 0.05), postoperative blood transfusion (p < 0.01) and LOS (p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, only greater ASA (p < 0.05) and surgical procedure (p < 0.01) were associated with the development of an SSI independently. Greater comorbidity but not obesity was independently associated with postoperative SIR and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing RAS. These results support the use of RAS for left sided CRC resections, particularly in the obese.

Reduced Port Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This systematic review evaluated the safety and efficacy of reduced port laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and compared its potential advantages over the conventional laparoscopic approach. Eighteen eligible articles were analyzed, including thirteen cohort studies and five randomized trials (n = 2945). There were no differences in total postoperative complications [OR of 0.99 (0.72 to 1.37)] nor those classified as Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIb. There were also no differences regarding operative time, blood loss, postoperative pain, weight loss, and improvement in comorbidities. In the reduced port group, hospital stay was slightly shorter [WDM of - 0.23 (- 0.39 to - 0.07)], and cosmetic results were better in the short term. Our meta-analysis shows reduced port sleeve gastrectomy can be safely performed in selected patients, although clinical benefits are unclear (PROSPERO (CRD42022372829)).

Scientific production on robotic metabolic and bariatric surgery: a comprehensive bibliometric analysis on its current world status

BACKGROUND

 Robotic metabolic and bariatric surgery (RMBS) has emerged as an innovative approach in the treatment of severe obesity by combining the ergonomic precision of robotic technology and instrumentation with the established benefits of weight loss surgery. This study employs a bibliometric approach to identify local research trends and worldwide patterns in RMBS.

MATERIALS & METHODS

 The research methodology used "robotic" and "metabolic" or "bariatric surgery" to search Web of Science. Articles that were published prior to December 31st, 2023, were included. The analyses were developed using the Rayyan and Bibliometric, in R Studio.

RESULTS

 265 articles from 51 different journals were included. Scientific production of RMBS experienced a significant annual growth rate of 21.96% from 2003 to 2023, resulting in an average of 12.6 papers published per year. A high correlation (R2 = 0.94) was found between the year and number of articles. The mean number of citations per document was 13.25. Approximately 90% of the journals were classified as zone 3, according to the Bradford categorization. International collaboration was identified in 10.57% of cases, with the University of California and the University of Illinois being the most common organizations. The countries with the highest number of corresponding authors, in descending order, were the United States of America, China, and Switzerland.

CONCLUSION

 Scientific production in RMBS has experienced sustained growth since the first original publications in 2003. While it has not yet reached the volume, impact, and international collaboration seen in studies related to non-robotic metabolic and bariatric surgery, RBMS holds potential that remains to be explored.

Predictors of postoperative bleeding after minimally invasive bariatric surgery

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive bariatric surgeries provide effective weight loss with fewer complications. However, postoperative bleeding remains a significant concern due to its potential for serious morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to identify factors predicting postoperative bleeding following laparoscopic and robotic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).

METHODS

We analyzed patients who underwent SG and RYGB using the MBSAQIP database from 2015 to 2021. Four multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to investigate the relationship between postoperative bleeding and 24 independent factors for laparoscopic SG (lapSG), robotic SG (rSG), laparoscopic RYGB (lapRYGB), and robotic RYGB (rRYGB).

RESULTS

We analyzed 659,294 lapSG, 53,548 rSG, 267,171 lapRYGB, and 22,492 rRYGB patients. In lapSG, the most significant factors included anticoagulation (OR 3.76; 95% CI 3.13-4.51), renal insufficiency (OR 2.06; 95% CI 1.37-3.09), history of DVT (OR 1.87; 95% CI 1.23-2.85), history of PE (OR 1.69; 95% CI 1.04-2.76, and BMI ≤ 40 (OR 1.22; 95% CI 1.09-1.38). In the rSG group, anticoagulation (OR 4.95; 95% CI 2.83-8.66), COPD (OR 2.80; 95% CI 1.29-6.05), and hyperlipidemia (OR 1.90; 95% CI 1.29-6.05) were significant factors. In lapRYGB, the most significant factors included anticoagulation (OR 3.68; 95% CI 3.11-4.35), renal insufficiency (OR 1.60; 95% CI 1.04-2.44), history of DVT (OR 1.70; 95% CI 1.09-2.07), cardiac stent (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.09-2.07), and BMI ≤ 40 (OR 1.16; 95% CI 1.03-1.29). For rRYGB, anticoagulation (OR 4.69; 95% CI 2.86-7.70), history of PE (OR 4.28; 95% CI 1.53-12.00), and cardiac stent (OR 2.15; 95% CI 0.06-4.34) were significant.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative anticoagulation, renal insufficiency, history of DVT and PE, a cardiac stent, and BMI ≤ 40 are associated with an increased risk of postoperative bleeding. The predictive factors were consistent across laparoscopic and robotic approaches in SG and RYGB procedures.

Costs of Robotic and Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery: A Retrospective Propensity Score-matched Analysis

PURPOSE

Robotic bariatric surgery has not shown significant advantages compared to laparoscopy, yet costs remain a major concern. The aim of our study was to assess costs of robotic and laparoscopic bariatric surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively collected data of all patients who underwent either robotic or laparoscopic bariatric surgery at our institution. We retrieved demographics, clinical characteristics, postoperative data, and costs using a bottom-up approach. The primary endpoint was hospital costs in the robotic and laparoscopic groups. Data was analyzed using a propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Out of the total 122 patients enrolled in the study, 42 were subsequently chosen based on propensity scores, with 21 patients allocated to each group. No difference in clinical characteristics and postoperative outcomes were noted. Length of hospital stay was 2.4 ± 0.7 days vs. 2.6 ± 1.1 days (p = 0.520). In the robotic and laparoscopic groups, total costs were USD 16,275 ± 4018 vs. 12,690 ± 2834 (absolute difference USD 3585, 95%CI 1416-5753, p = 0.002), direct costs were USD 5037 ± 1282 vs. 3720 ± 1308 (absolute difference USD 1316, 95% CI 509-2214, p = 0.002), and indirect costs were USD 11,238 ± 3234 vs. 8970 ± 3021 (absolute difference USD 2,268, 95% CI 317-4220, p = 0.024). Subgroup analyses revealed a decreasing trend in the cost difference in patients undergoing primary gastric bypass and revisional surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall hospital costs were higher in patients operated on with the robotic system than with laparoscopy, yet a clinical advantage has not been demonstrated so far. Subgroup analyses showed lesser disparity in costs among patients undergoing revisional bariatric surgery, where robotics are likely to be more worthwhile.

Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted primary bariatric-metabolic surgery. Are we still expecting to overcome the learning curve? A propensity score-matched analysis of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery is becoming increasingly popular in bariatric-metabolic surgery. However, its superiority regarding postoperative outcomes compared with conventional laparoscopy has not been clearly proven. With growing adoption of robotic surgery and improved technologies, benefits should become more evident.

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate readmission and reoperation rates after bariatric-metabolic surgery performed by conventional laparoscopy versus robotic-assisted from 2015 to 2021.

SETTING

Academic institution.

METHODS

The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) was reviewed for primary bariatric operations performed with conventional laparoscopy versus robotic-assisted. Postoperative outcomes were compared in a propensity score-matched sample.

RESULTS

Of 1,059,348 cases meeting inclusion criteria, 921,322 (87%) were conventional laparoscopic bariatric-metabolic surgeries, which were matched 1:1 with robotic-assisted cases (138,026). Reoperation (odds ratio [OR] 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-1.15, P = .0463), postoperative morbidity (OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.01-1.12, P = .0193), readmission (OR 1.14; 95% CI 1.09-1.18, P < .0001), and emergency department visits (OR 1.06; 95% CI 1.03-1.09, P = .0003) at 30 days postoperatively were significantly greater for robotic-assisted cases. Robotic-assisted cases had a similar mortality rate at 30 days postoperatively and length of stay >3 days when compared with conventional laparoscopic cases. Similar results were observed in cases from 2020 to 2021, except for reoperation and emergency department visits, which showed no difference between groups and length of stay >3 days, which was greater in robotic-assisted cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show a greater readmission and reoperation rate and greater morbidity at 30 days postoperatively in robotic-assisted bariatric-metabolic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopy. Analyzing only cases performed between 2020 and 2021, robotic surgery also does not show superiority over conventional laparoscopy.

Comparison between DaVinci® and Hugo™-RAS Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass in bariatric surgery

The application of a robotic platform in the bariatric surgical field is intended to enhance the already established advantages of minimally invasive surgery in terms of both technical and clinical outcomes. These advantages are especially relevant for technically challenging multiquadrant operations such as Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB). Consequently, robotic-assisted surgery has emerged as a possible application for bariatric surgeries. The study attempts to assess feasibility and safety of the Hugo™-Robotic-Assisted Surgery System (Hugo™-RAS) platform compared to the DaVinci® Surgical System (DaVinci®-SS) with a focus on complication rates and operative times. We retrospectively reviewed bariatric procedures performed from January 2013 until December 2023. We included all robotic RYGBs performed using Hugo™-RAS and DaVinci®-SS platforms. The study utilized Propensity Score Matching (PSM) analysis to address bias in selection, matching patients based on age, gender, body mass index, comorbidities and past abdominal operations. One hundred thirty-five patients were identified: 90 DaVinci®-SS and 45 Hugo™-RAS procedures. After PSM, each group consisted of 45 patients. There was no discernible disparity observed in relation to early (≤ 30 days) postoperative complications rate (p = 1), mean operative time (for docking time, console time and total operative time: p = 0.176, p = 0.678, p = 0.229, respectively) and postoperative hospital stay (p = 0.052) between DaVinci®-RSS and Hugo™-RAS procedures. Our results suggest that application of both Hugo™-RAS and DaVinci®-SS robotic platforms to RYGB is related to comparable safety profiles. Although DaVinci®-SS remains the most widely adopted platform in clinical practice, this study underscores the potential role of the Hugo™-RAS to provide effective solutions in robotic bariatric procedures.

Bridging the Gap: A Literature Review of Advancements in Obesity and Diabetes Mellitus Management

This literature review explores advancements in obesity and diabetes mellitus diagnosis and treatment, highlighting recent innovations that promise more personalized and effective healthcare interventions. For obesity diagnosis, traditional methods like body mass index (BMI) calculations are now complemented by bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans, with emerging biomarkers from “omics” technologies. Diabetes diagnosis has advanced with standard hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) testing supplemented by novel measures such as advanced glycation end products (AGEs) and autoantibodies, alongside the use of artificial intelligence to enhance diagnostic accuracy. Treatment options for obesity are expanding beyond traditional methods. Minimally invasive bariatric surgeries, endoscopic procedures, fecal microbiota transplants (FMTs), and pharmaceuticals like GLP-1 receptor agonists (semaglutide, tirzepatide) show promising results. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and prescription digital therapeutics (PDTs) are also valuable tools for weight management. Diabetes treatment is also undergoing a transformation. Ultra-long-acting insulins and innovative oral insulin delivery methods are on the horizon. SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists are proving to be effective medications for blood sugar control. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems and closed-loop insulin delivery are revolutionizing diabetes management, while stem cell therapy holds promise for the future. By integrating advanced diagnostic tools with personalized treatment plans, obesity and diabetes care are entering a new era. This personalized approach empowers patients and paves the way for improved health outcomes and a better quality of life.

A superior approach? The role of robotic sleeve gastrectomy in patients with super super obesity using the 2019-2022 MBSAQIP database

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in patients with BMI ≥ 60 presents technical challenges, that might be overcome by robotic surgery, but its effectiveness has not been rigorously evaluated. We compared the 30-day outcomes of LSG and robotic sleeve gastrectomy (RSG) in patients with BMI < 60 versus ≥ 60 and between LSG and RSG in patients with BMI ≥ 60.

METHODS

Patients aged 18-65 years who underwent sleeve gastrectomy were included using the 2019-2022 MBSAQIP database. We performed a Propensity Score Matching analysis, with 21 preoperative characteristics. We compared 30-day postoperative outcomes for patients with BMI < 60 versus ≥ 60 using either a laparoscopic (Analysis 1) or robotic approach (Analysis 2) and compared LSG versus RSG in patients with BMI ≥ 60 (Analysis 3).

RESULTS

297,250 patients underwent LSG and 81,008 RSG. Propensity-matched¸ outcomes in analysis 1 (13,503 matched cases), showed that patients with BMI ≥ 60 had higher rates of mortality (0.1% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.014), staple line leak (0.3% vs. 0.2%, p = 0.035), postoperative bleeding (0.2% vs 0.1%, p = 0.028), readmissions (3.5% vs. 2.4%, p < 0.001), and interventions (0.7% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.028) when compared to patients with BMI < 60. In analysis 2 (4350 matched cases), patients with BMI ≥ 60 demonstrated longer operative times, length of stay, and higher rates of unplanned ICU when compared to patients with BMI < 60. In analysis 3 (4370 matched cases), patients who underwent RSG had fewer readmissions (2.9% vs. 3.7%, p = 0.037), staple line leaks (0.1% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.029), and postoperative bleeding (0.1% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.045), compared to LSG. Conversely, a longer operative time (92.74 ± 38.65 vs. 71.69 ± 37.45 min, p < 0.001) was reported.

CONCLUSION

LSG patients with BMI ≥ 60 have higher rates of complications compared to patients with a BMI < 60. Moreover, some outcomes may be improved with the robotic approach in patients with BMI ≥ 60. These results underscore the importance of considering a robotic approach in this super super obese population.

Revisional bariatric surgery using robotic-assisted surgery in a national medical center in Mexico

Long-term postoperative complications of metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) are more frequent than those of primary surgery. Robotic-assisted procedures offer several advantages over traditional laparoscopy, but there are limited data. A retrospective study of 29 patients who underwent a revisional robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RRYGB) in a Tertiary Level Hospital. Variables included were demographics, causes for revision, operative details, complications, and weight loss outcomes up to 54 month post-RRYGB. Causes for conversion were weight loss failure (WLF), weight regain (WR), Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD), or Joint Pain (JP). We assessed 29 patients. Causes for conversion included WLF (34%), WR (15%), WR with GERD (20%), GERD (24%), and JP (3%). Initial BMI was 53.43 kg/m2 ± 8.75. Mean length of hospital stay (LOS) was 2 days. Total operative time was 126 min. ± 43.45. Excess weight loss at 1 year post-surgery was 82.66% (p < 0.0001), with mean BMI of 30.93 kg/m2 (p < 0.001). At 3 years, mean %EWL was 71.26% and a mean BMI 33.81 kg/m2 (p < 0.0001). At 4.5 years, mean %EWL was 59.29% and mean BMI 37.27 kg/m2 (p < 0.0001). One complication (8%) was found (jejunojejunal stenosis). There was no mortality. The initial experience with RRYGB shows acceptable outcomes, including low morbidity, no mortality, excellent weight loss after the revisional surgery, and promising reduction in operative times, with important implications on reduction of the total cost of the procedure.

Trends in bariatric surgery training: bariatric operations performed by Fellowship Council trainees from 2012 to 2019

BACKGROUND

The American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) Fellowship Certificate was created to ensure satisfactory training and requires a minimum number of anastomotic cases. With laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy becoming the most common bariatric procedure in the United States, this may present a challenge for fellows to obtain adequate numbers for ASMBS certification.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate bariatric fellowship trends from 2012 to 2019, the types, numbers, and approaches of surgical procedures performed by fellows were examined.

SETTING

Academic training centers in the United States.

METHODS

Data were obtained from Fellowship Council records of all cases performed by fellows in ASMBS-accredited bariatric surgery training programs between 2012 and 2019. A retrospective analysis using standard descriptive statistical methods was performed to investigate trends in total case volume and cases per fellow for common bariatric procedures.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2019, sleeve gastrectomy cases performed by all Fellowship Council fellows nearly doubled from 6,514 to 12,398, compared with a slight increase for gastric bypass, from 8,486 to 9,204. Looking specifically at bariatric fellowships, the mean number of gastric bypass cases per fellow dropped over time, from 91.1 cases (SD = 46.8) in 2012-2013 to 52.6 (SD = 62.1) in 2018-2019. Mean sleeve gastrectomy cases per fellow increased from 54.7 (SD = 31.5) in 2012-2013 to a peak of 98.6 (SD = 64.3) in 2015-2016. Robotic gastric bypasses also increased from 4% of all cases performed in 2012-2013 to 13.3% in 2018-2019.

CONCLUSIONS

Bariatric fellowship training has seen a decrease in gastric bypasses, an increase in sleeve gastrectomies, and an increase in robotic surgery completed by each fellow from 2012 to 2019.

The Trajectory of Revisional Bariatric Surgery: Open to Laparoscopic to Robotic

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is the most effective therapeutic intervention for patients with obesity, with sleeve gastrectomy (SG) being the most commonly performed primary MBS procedure. Long-term studies have demonstrated that 15-20% of patients require revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) due to weight-related issues or surgical complications. Despite the gold standard being laparoscopic revision, there are other available approaches such as open or robotic-assisted. An extensive literature review was performed for articles from their inception to February 2024. A descriptive review of MBS procedures (SG, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), single anastomosis duodeno-ileostomy (SADI) and biliopancreatic diversion-duodenal switch (BPD-DS)) was carried out to report and compare outcomes between primary and revisional bariatric surgery. A similar review was conducted to compare outcomes of revisional approaches (open, laparoscopic, robotic). RYGB remains the dominant RBS with a similar safety profile compared to revisional SADI and BPD-DS. In terms of the RBS surgical approach, all three options showed comparable short and long-term outcomes, with robotic RBS being associated with longer operative time and variable length of stay. Additional long-term studies are required to further validate our conclusions.

The distribution of robotic surgery in general and visceral surgery departments in Switzerland - a nationwide inquiry

Objectives

Since its introduction as a clinical technique, robotic surgery has been extended to different fields of surgery. However, the indications as well as the number of robotic procedures varied in different institutions. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the current use of robotic surgery in general and digestive surgery in Switzerland.

Methods

All Swiss surgical departments that are recognized training institutes for postgraduate training in surgery by the Swiss Institute of Medical Education (SIWF) were queried with a detailed questionnaire regarding the use of robotic surgery techniques and were analyzed regarding hospital size and type of hospital.

Results

Ninety-three departments were queried, and 67 % (n=63) answered the survey. Fifty-eight were public, and five were private institutions. Seventeen (26 %) of the queried departments used robotic surgery in digestive surgery. Four out of 17 (23 %) of the departments that performed robotic surgery were private hospitals, while 13 (77 %) were public institutions. In the majority of departments, robotic surgery of the rectum (n=12; 70.6 %) and colon (n=11; 64.7 %) was performed, followed by hernia procedures (n=8; 47.1 %) and fundoplication (n=7; 41.2 %). Less frequently, pancreatic resections (n=5; 29.4 %), cholecystectomy (n=4; 23.5 %), adrenalectomy (n=4; 23.5 %), gastric bypass (n=3; 17.7 %), gastric sleeve (n=3; 17.7 %), hepatic procedures (n=2; 11.7 %), or small bowel resections (n=1; 5.9 %) were performed as robotic procedures. More than 25 procedures per year per department were performed for hernia surgery (n=5 departments), gastric bypass (n=2 departments), cholecystectomy, fundoplication, and colon surgery (each n=1 department).

Conclusions

The number and range of robotic procedures performed in Switzerland varied widely. Higher accreditation for general surgery or subspecialization of visceral surgery of the department was positively associated with the use of robotic techniques, reflecting an unequal availability of robotic surgery.

The current application and evidence for robotic approach in abdominal surgery: A narrative literature review

The current application of robotic surgery is evolving at a high pace in the current years. The technical advantages enable several abdominal surgical procedures to be performed minimally invasive instead of open surgery. Furthermore, procedures previously performed successfully using standard laparoscopy are now performed with a robotic approach, with conflicting results. The present narrative review reports the current literature on the robotic surgical procedures typically performed in a typical Scandinavian surgical department: colorectal, hernia, hepato-biliary, and esophagogastric surgery.

Can robotic gastric bypass be considered a valid alternative to laparoscopy? Our early experience and literature review

Background

Robotic bariatric surgery serves as an alternative to laparoscopy. The technology provides the surgeon with an accurate three-dimensional view, allowing complex maneuvers while maintaining full control of the operating room.

Hypothesis

We report our experience with this innovative surgery compared with laparoscopy during Roux-en-Y gastric bypass to demonstrate its safety and feasibility. The aim of this study is to evaluate potential differences between the robotic and laparoscopic techniques.

Materials and methods

Our study retrospectively identified 153 consecutive obese patients who underwent either laparoscopic or robotic gastric bypass (RGB) procedures over a 2-year period at the Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia. Data on demographics, operative time, conversion rate, length of hospital stay, and mortality were collected and compared between two groups of patients: 82 patients who underwent laparoscopic procedures and 71 who underwent robotic procedures.

Results

We analyzed 153 patients who underwent gastric bypass with a mean age of 42.58 years, of whom 74 were female; 71 were treated with a robotic approach and 82 with a laparoscopic approach. The mean operative time was 224.75 ± 10.4 min for RGB (including docking time) and 101.22 min for laparoscopic gastric bypass (LGB) (p < 0.05), which is statistically significant. The median length of stay was 4.1 days for the RGB group and 3.9 days for the LGB group (p = 0.89). There is only one conversion to laparoscopy in the RGB group. We observed only one case of postoperative complications, specifically one episode of endoluminal bleeding in the laparoscopic group, which was successfully managed with medical treatment. No mortality was observed in either group.

Conclusion

The statistical analysis shows to support the robotic approach that had a lower incidence of complications but a longer operative duration. Based on our experience, the laparoscopic approach remains a technique with more haptic feedback than the robotic approach, making surgeons feel more confident.This study has been registered on ClinicalTrial.gov Protocol Registration and Results System with this ID: NCT05746936 for the Organization UFoggia (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05746936).

Use of targeted educational resources to improve robotic bariatric surgery training

BACKGROUND

Evidence for how to best train surgical residents for robotic bariatric procedures is lacking. We developed targeted educational resources to promote progression on the robotic bariatric learning curve. This study aimed to characterize the effect of resources on resident participation in robotic bariatric procedures.

METHODS

Performance metrics from the da Vinci Surgical System were retrospectively reviewed for sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) cases involving general surgery trainees with a single robotic bariatric surgeon. Pictorial case guides and narrated operative videos were developed for these procedures and disseminated to trainees. Percent active control time (%ACT)-amount of trainee console time spent in active instrument manipulations over total active time from both consoles-was the primary outcome measure following dissemination. One-way ANOVA, Student's t-tests, and Pearson correlations were applied.

RESULTS

From September 2020 to July 2021, 50 cases (54% SG, 46% RYGB) involving 14 unique trainees (PGY1-PGY5) were included. From November 2021 to May 2022 following dissemination, 29 cases (34% SG, 66% RYGB) involving 8 unique trainees were included. Mean %ACT significantly increased across most trainee groups following resource distribution: 21% versus 38% for PGY3s (p = 0.087), 32% versus 45% for PGY4s (p = 0.0009), and 38% versus 57% for PGY5s (p = 0.0015) and remained significant when stratified by case type. Progressive trainee %ACT was not associated with total active time for SG cases before or after intervention (pre r = - 0.0019, p = 0.9; post r = - 0.039, p = 0.9). It was moderately positively associated with total active time for RYGB cases before dissemination (r = 0.46, p = 0.027) but lost this association following intervention (r = 0.16, p = 0.5).

CONCLUSION

Use of targeted educational resources promoted increases in trainee participation in robotic bariatric procedures with more time spent actively operating at the console. As educators continue to develop robotic training curricula, efforts should include high-quality resource development for other sub-specialty procedures. Future work will examine the impact of increased trainee participation on clinical and patient outcomes.

Robotic versus laparoscopic gastric bypass in bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis on perioperative outcomes

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted surgery has emerged as a compelling approach to bariatric surgery. However, current literature has not consistently demonstrated superior outcomes to laparoscopic bariatric surgery to justify its higher cost. With its mechanical advantages, the potential gains from the robotic surgical platform are likely to be apparent in more complex cases such as gastric bypass, especially revisional cases.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the literature and evaluate the peri-operative outcomes of patients with obesity undergoing robotic gastric bypass versus laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery.

SETTING

Systematic review.

METHODS

A literature search of Embase, Medline, Pubmed, Cochrane library, and Google Scholar was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies comparing outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic gastric bypass for obesity were included.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight eligible studies comprised a total of 82,155 patients; 9051 robotic bypass surgery (RBS) versus 73,104 laparoscopic bypass surgery (LBS) were included. All included studies compared Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. RBS was noted to have higher reoperation rate within 30 days (4.4% versus 3.4%; odds ratio 1.31 [95% CI, 1.04-1.66]; P = .027; I2 = 43.5%) than LBS. All other endpoints measured (complication rate, anastomotic leak, anastomotic stricture, surgical site infections, hospital readmission, length of stay, operative time, conversion rate and mortality) did not show any difference between RBS and LBS.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in key outcome measures in robotic versus laparoscopic gastric bypass. RBS was associated with a slightly higher reoperation rate and there was no reduction in overall complication rate with the use of robotic platform.

Robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with the novel platform HugoTM RAS: preliminary experience in 15 patients

Robotic assisted surgery is a rapidly developing field in bariatric surgery. Its wide diffusion has led to the development and standardisation of robotic assisted approaches for various bariatric operations. However, further application has been limited thus far due to issues of cost-effectiveness and accessibility. The introduction of new robotic platforms may help overcome those obstacles. In this study, we present the first fifteen cases of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) operations performed with the new Hugo™ RAS system (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA). From January to March 2023, consecutive patients scheduled for minimal invasive Roux-en-Y-Bypass were randomly selected and underwent the procedure robotic-assisted with the new platform. No exclusion criteria were applied. Seven female and eight male patients with a median BMI of 42 (range: 36-50) and obesity-related comorbidities in eight cases underwent RYGB. The median docking time was 7 min (range: 6-8.5) and the median console time was 100 min (range: 70-150). Procedures were performed without intraoperative complications and no conversion to laparoscopy or open surgery was noted. Operative times were indicative of a steep learning curve. No early post-operative complications were observed. Based on our initial experience, RYGB with the Hugo™ RAS system is promising and may be integrated in established robotic programmes without requiring a long adaptation period.

Effectiveness of a Modified Nurse-Led COUGH Bundle for Obese Patients After Bariatric Surgery

BACKGROUND

Obesity commonly affects postsurgical pulmonary outcomes and is associated with increased oxygen usage, length of recovery and hospital stay, discharge to high levels of care, cost, morbidity, and mortality.

LOCAL PROBLEM

No standardized pulmonary care bundle for obese patients after bariatric surgery was available in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) at a hospital in Singapore.

METHODS

This quality improvement project was a prospective, single-cohort, pre- and posttest intervention design with 151 patients recruited.

INTERVENTIONS

Teaching and implementation of a modified nurse-led COUGH bundle was carried out on obese patients after their bariatric surgery.

RESULTS

Postbariatric surgery patients with the nurse-led COUGH bundle had significantly less consumption of oxygen in the PACU and step-down units. The PACU and hospital length of stay were also reduced.

CONCLUSIONS

The modified nurse-led COUGH bundle can reduce patients' oxygen usage and hospital stay after their bariatric surgery.

Impact of Robotic Assistance on Complications in Bariatric Surgery at Expert Laparoscopic Surgery Centers: A Retrospective Comparative Study With Propensity Score

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the way robotic assistance affected rate of complications in bariatric surgery at expert robotic and laparoscopic surgery facilities.

BACKGROUND

While the benefits of robotic assistance were established at the beginning of surgical training, there is limited data on the robot's influence on experienced bariatric laparoscopic surgeons.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study using the BRO clinical database (2008-2022) collecting data of patients operated on in expert centers. We compared the serious complication rate (defined as a Clavien score≥3) in patients undergoing metabolic bariatric surgery with or without robotic assistance. We used a directed acyclic graph to identify the variables adjustment set used in a multivariable linear regression, and a propensity score matching to calculate the average treatment effect (ATE) of robotic assistance.

RESULTS

The study included 35,043 patients [24,428 sleeve gastrectomy (SG); 10,452 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB); 163 single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S)], with 938 operated on with robotic assistance (801 SG; 134 RYGB; 3 SADI-S), among 142 centers. Overall, we found no benefit of robotic assistance regarding the risk of complications (average treatment effect=-0.05, P =0.794), with no difference in the RYGB+SADI group ( P =0.322) but a negative trend in the SG group (more complications, P =0.060). Length of hospital stay was decreased in the robot group (3.7±11.1 vs 4.0±9.0 days, P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic assistance reduced the length of stay but did not statistically significantly reduce postoperative complications (Clavien score≥3) following either GBP or SG. A tendency toward an elevated risk of complications following SG requires more supporting studies.

Epidemiology of the surgical management of obesity

Surgical interventions for obesity have quintupled in the world in 15 years (140,000 in 2003 vs. 720,000 in 2018), however growth has slowed since 2011. This progressive increase varies by country and from 2008 through 2018, 6.5 million people have undergone bariatric surgery. Growth was strongest in the Asia/Pacific region. Belgium is the country performing the most operations per number of inhabitants: (127 operations per 100,000). France is in 7th place with 72 operations per 100,000 and 70% of patients are operated in surgical services that perform more than 100 procedures per year. The sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most commonly performed intervention while the adjustable gastric band (AGB) has practically disappeared. Along with the intragastric balloon, novel endoluminal procedures are being evaluated. A real management policy is needed to respond to this evolution of both epidemiology and techniques.

[The first experience of robot-assisted bariatric surgery using the Senhance system in patients with morbid obesity]

OBJECTIVE

To study the results of robot-assisted bariatric surgery using the Senhance system in patients with morbid obesity.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective cohort study included 74 patients who underwent bariatric surgery (Senhance digital laparoscopy system) between January 2022 and May 2023. Of these, 12 patients underwent robot-assisted longitudinal gastrectomy, 20 patients - robot-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, 36 patients - robot-assisted gastric bypass with one anastomosis/mini-gastric bypass, 6 patients - surgical exploration. We assessed duration of surgery, docking, placement of trocars and robotic manipulators, the need for their intraoperative displacement, incidence of intraoperative complications and conversions to laparoscopic surgery, intraoperative blood loss and early postoperative complications, severity of pain syndrome on the 1st day after surgery.

RESULTS

Mean surgery time was 87 [67, 120], 116 [78, 139], 96 [79, 125] and 141 [112, 184] min, respectively. Intraoperative blood loss was less than 50 ml. There were no complications requiring surgical treatment, cardiovascular, respiratory and other complications within 1 month.

CONCLUSION

Robot-assisted bariatric surgery using the Senhance system is feasible and safe for patients. Immediate results of robotic surgery are comparable to those after laparoscopy. However, large experience and cost-effectiveness analysis are required to assess the feasibility of robotic systems in bariatric surgery.

Robotic vs laparoscopic approach for single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy: a propensity score matching analysis

Biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch and single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) are technically demanding hypo-absorptive bariatric procedures. They are often indicated in superobese patients (BMI ≥ 50 kg/m²), as robotic platform could improve ergonomics against a thick abdominal wall, preventing bending of instruments and simplifying hand-sewn anastomoses. We aimed to report our experience with robotic SADI-S (R-group) and to compare outcomes with the laparoscopic (L-group) approach. Among 2143 patients who underwent bariatric procedures at our institution between July 2016 and June 2021, 116 (5.4%) consenting patients were scheduled for SADI-S as primary or revisional procedure: 94 L-group, 22 R-group. R-group and L-group patients were matched using PSM analysis to overcome patients selection bias. Postoperative complications, operative time (OT), post-operative stay (POS) and follow-up data were compared. After PSM, 44 patients (22 patients for each group) were compared (Chi-square 0.317, p = 0.985). Median age, gender, median BMI, preoperative rates of comorbidities, previous abdominal bariatric and non-bariatric surgeries and type of surgical procedures (SADI-S/SADI) were comparable. Median OT was shorter in the L-group (130 Vs 191 min, p < 0.001). 30-days' re-operative complications and late complications rates were comparable. At 25-months' mean follow-up, the median Percentage Excess Weight Loss (72%) was comparable between the groups (p = 0.989). L-group and R-group were comparable in terms of re-operative complication rate and short-term outcomes. The robotic platform may increase the rate of single step procedure in challenging cases. Larger studies with longer follow-up and cost-analysis are necessary to draw definitive conclusions.

Five Year Trends in the Utilization of Robotic Bariatric Surgery Procedures, United States 2015-2019

PURPOSE

Robotic approaches have been steadily replacing laparoscopic approaches in metabolic and bariatric surgeries (MBS); however, their superiority has not been rigorously evaluated. The main goal of the study was to evaluate the 5-year utilization trends of robotic MBS and to compare to laparoscopic outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 2015-2019 MBSAQIP data. Kruskal-Wallis test/Wilcoxon and Fisher's exact/chi-square were used to compare continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Generalized linear models were used to compare surgery outcomes.

RESULTS

The use of robotic MBS increased from 6.2% in 2015 to 13.5% in 2019 (N= 775,258). Robotic MBS patients had significantly higher age, BMI, and likelihood of 12 diseases compared to laparoscopic patients. After adjustment, robotic MBS patients showed higher 30-day interventions and 30-day readmissions alongside longer surgery time (26-38 min).

CONCLUSION

Robotic MBS shows higher intervention and readmission even after controlling for cofounding variables.

Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Revisional Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on Perioperative Outcomes

This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the role of robotic-assisted surgery in patients undergoing revisional bariatric surgery (RBS). According to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a literature search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar was performed: (("sleeve"AND "gastr*")OR "bariatric"OR "gastric bypass")AND("robot*"OR "DaVinci"OR "Da Vinci")AND("revision*"OR "conversion*"). In this review, six studies with 29,890 patients were included (2459 in the robotic group). No difference in postoperative complications (RR 1.070, 95%CI 0.930-1.231, p = 0.950), conversions to open surgery (RR 1.339, 95%CI 0.736-2.438, p = 0.339), length of stay (SMD - 0.041, 95%CI - 0.420-0.337, p = 0.831) or operative time (RR 0.219, 95%CI - 0.539-0.977, p = 0.571) was found. This systematic review and meta-analysis showed no significant advantage of robotic-assisted RBS; on the other hand, it showed a non-inferior efficacy compared to standard laparoscopy.