Technique Evolution, Learning Curve, and Outcomes of 200 Robot-Assisted Gastric Bypass Procedures: a 5-Year Experience

A Systematic Review to Summarise and Appraise the Reporting of Surgical Innovation: a Case Study in Robotic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

Robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RRYGB) is an innovative alternative to traditional laparoscopic approaches. Literature has been published investigating its safety/efficacy; however, the quality of reporting is uncertain. This systematic review used the Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment and Long-term follow-up (IDEAL) framework to assess the reporting quality of available literature. A narrative summary was formulated, assessing how comprehensively governance/ethics, patient selection, demographics, surgeon expertise/training, technique description and outcomes were reported. Forty-seven studies published between 2005 and 2024 were included. There was incomplete/inconsistent reporting of governance/ethics, patient selection, surgeon expertise/training and technique description, with heterogenous outcome reporting. RRYGB reporting was poor and did not align with IDEAL guidance. Robust prospective studies reporting findings using IDEAL/other guidance are required to facilitate safe widespread adoption of RRYGB and other surgical innovations.

Australian experience with robot-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with comparison to a conventional laparoscopic series

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery is a novel approach to abdominal surgery. In Australia, the uptake of robotic assistance for bariatric surgery has been relatively slow compared to many other countries. The aim of this study is to report the first high volume experience of robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery in Australia (RRYGB) and compare outcomes with a similar laparoscopic group (LRYGB).

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 100 RRYGB versus 100 LRYGB was carried out over a period of seven years performed by two surgeons. These groups were matched by revisional status. Outcomes recorded included operative times, conversion rate, hospital stay, short-term (30 days) complication rates, and long-term complication rates. Baseline comorbidities of patients were also recorded.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar except for comorbidity rates (higher in LRYGB group). The mean age was 43 (RRYGB) and 44(LRYGB) years, respectively. The mean pre-op BMI was 44.3 in the RRYGB group and 44.7 in the LRYGB group. Mean operating time in the RRYGB group was 208 min compared to 175 min in the LRYGB group. The number of patients with major complications was 1 in the robotic group versus 5 in the laparoscopic group (P: 0.2166). Minor complications were higher in the robotic group (17 vs. 5, P: 0.0054). Median length of stay of patients with RRYGB was 4 days compared to 5 days for the LRYGB group.

CONCLUSION

RRYGB has been successfully implemented in Australia with low complication rates compared to conventional laparoscopic RYGB. Operating times are longer compared to LRYGB which is consistent with most published literature. To justify increased costs generally associated with robotic surgery, better quality studies are needed to accurately assess potential cost savings with length of stay and safety benefits to patients and institutions.

Technical aspects and standardization of the totally robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Results of a single surgeon experience with a 5-year follow-up

INTRODUCTION

The use of robotics in bariatric surgery is increasing worldwide, with as main objective reducing complications and optimising surgical outcome. This study presents the results of a single surgeon 8-year experience with a totally robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).

METHODS

A total of 183 consecutive patients underwent a robotic bariatric procedure. A retrospective analysis was performed of all patient files to obtain patient characteristics, weight loss results and per- and postoperative morbidity. For long-term follow-up all patients were contacted one by one.

RESULTS

In 155/183 patients, a primary RYGB was performed, 23 procedures were revisional cases and in 5 other procedures were performed. Mean initial weight was 112.07 (±20.5) kg, mean start BMI was 40.8 (±5.36) kg/m². There were no conversions and no major intraoperative complications. In the early postoperative period we note two revisions; one postoperative bleeding and one missed iatrogenic enterotomy. Mean length of stay in the hospital was 3.50 (±1.20) days. After a mean follow-up of 62.06 (±32.76) months, mean BMI was 28.07 (±4.88) kg/m² with an % excess body mass index loss of 84.02 (±31.64) %. Patient satisfaction was high, with 95.1% of the patients being happy. The main complaint in the remaining patients was weight regain.

CONCLUSION

The robotic RYGB is a safe and reproducible approach to treat morbid obesity. A secure hand-sewn gastrojejunal anastomosis, quick recovery and better ergonomics are the main advantages of this technique.

Robotic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: A Single Surgeon's Experience with 527 Consecutive Patients

Background and Objectives

Robotic bariatric surgery is increasingly adopted by surgeons. We present the surgical results of 527 consecutive patients who underwent robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) using the standard technique.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was performed including 527 consecutive patients who underwent robotic RYGB between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2021.

Results

The mean age of the patients was 41 years, with a male/female sex distribution of 143/384 (27.1%/72.9%). Type 2 diabetes in the pre-operative period was diagnosed in 31% of patients. The median pre-operative body mass index (BMI) was 44.6 kg/m² (range, 35-64). The mean operation time was 134 min for robotic RYGB, including the docking process. Early (< 30 days) complications included ileus (0.2%), atelectasis (0.2%), thromboembolic (0.2%) events, and surgical-site infection (0.2%). No leakage or bleeding of the gastrojejunal and jejunojejunal anastomoses were recorded. Oral food intake was begun at 1.8 days on average. The average hospital stay was 2 days. Despite a range of BMI values, operation times and gastrojejunal anastomosis times did not show significant differences. There were no significant differences in mean operation time or mean gastrojejunal anastomosis time over the years.

Conclusions

The robotic approach is effective and safe for patients undergoing RYGB. This technique provides satisfactory results with short-term surgical outcomes. However, the real benefits of robotic RYGB should be further evaluated by well-conducted randomized trials. Even in difficult cases with higher BMI values, optimal operation times and similar operative efficiency can be obtained if a standard operation technique is applied.

Factors Associated with Weight Loss After Metabolic Surgery in a Multiethnic Sample of 1012 Patients

BACKGROUND

Metabolic surgery is the most effective method for weight loss in the long-term treatment of morbid obesity and its comorbidities. The primary aim of this study was to examine factors associated with percent total weight loss (%TWL) after metabolic surgery among an ethnically diverse sample of patients.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on 1012 patients who underwent either a sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) at our institution between January 2008 and June 2015.

RESULTS

African Americans had a lower %TWL than non-Hispanic/Latino Whites at 6, 9, 12, 18, and 48 months. At all timeframes, there was a negative association between pre-surgery TWL and %TWL after surgery. Female sex was negatively associated with %TWL at 3 months only. Higher initial BMI was also associated with greater post-operative %TWL at 18, 24 and 36 months. Older patients had lower %TWL at 6, 9, 12 and 24 months post-surgery. Patients who received RYGB had greater %TWL than those who received SG at 3, 6, 9, 12, 24 and 36 months.

CONCLUSIONS

African Americans had a lower %TWL than non-Hispanic/Latino Whites at most time points; there were no other significant race/ethnicity or sex differences. BMI (greater initial BMI), age (lower) and RYGB were associated with a greater post-operative %TWL at certain post-surgery follow-up time points. A limitation of this study is that there was missing data at a number of time points due to lack of attendance at certain follow-up visits.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Perioperative Nutrition, Metabolic, and Nonsurgical Support of Patients Undergoing Bariatric Procedures - 2019 Update: Cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists

OBJECTIVE

The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society (TOS), American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS), Obesity Medicine Association (OMA), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, algorithms, and checklists.

METHODS

Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts.

RESULTS

New or updated topics in this CPG include: contextualization in an adiposity-based chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current health care arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest).

CONCLUSIONS

Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory, with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.

Rethinking Patient and Medical Professional Perspectives on Bariatric Surgery as a Medically Necessary Treatment

The prevalence of class 3 obesity (body mass index ≥40 kg/m²) is 7.7% of the United States adult population; thus, more than 25 million people may be medically appropriate for consideration of bariatric surgery as therapy for severe obesity. Although bariatric surgery is the most effective therapy for patients with severe obesity, the surgery is performed in less than 1% of patients annually for whom it may be appropriate. Patients' and medical professionals' misperceptions about obesity and bariatric surgery create barriers to accessing bariatric surgery that are not given adequate attention and clinical consideration. Commonly cited patient barriers are lack of knowledge about the severity of obesity, the perception that obesity is a lifestyle problem rather than a chronic disease, and fear that bariatric surgery is dangerous. Medical professional barriers include failing to recognize causes of obesity and weight gain, providing recommendations that are inconsistent with current obesity treatment guidelines, and being uncomfortable counseling patients about treatment options for severe obesity. Previous research has revealed that medical professional counseling and accurate perception of the health risks associated with severe obesity are strong predictors of patients' willingness to consider bariatric surgery. This article reviews patient and medical professional barriers to acceptance of bariatric surgery as a treatment of medical necessity and offers practical advice for medical professionals to rethink perspectives about bariatric surgery when it is medically and psychologically appropriate.

Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy in the Super-obese

BACKGROUND

The robotic platform is often used for bariatric surgery in superobese patients (body mass index ≥ 50 kg/m²) with the assumption that it offers a technical advantage. This study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted sleeve gastrectomy (RSG) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in superobese patients.

METHODS

The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database was queried for superobese patients undergoing nonrevisional RSG and LSG from 2015 through 2017. Univariate analysis and multivariable logistic regression were used to compare outcomes in RSG and LSG.

RESULTS

A total of 61,493 patients (4685 RSG and 56,808 LSG) were identified. Patients were similar in terms of age (RSG 42.3 ± 11.8 versus LSG 42.4 ± 11.7 y; P = 0.60) and body mass index (RSG 56.8 ± 6.9 versus LSG 56.9 ± 7.1 kg/m²; P = 0.17). The RSG group had a longer operative time (102.4 ± 46.0 versus 74.7 ± 37.5 min; P < 0.01) and length of stay (1.79 ± 1.78 versus 1.66 ± 1.51 d; P < 0.01). Overall morbidity (RSG 3.5% versus LSG 3.7%; P = 0.54) and mortality (RSG 0.1% versus LSG 0.1%; P = 0.73) were similar between the two groups. After adjustment, RSG represented an independent risk factor for organ-space surgical site infection (adjusted odds ratio 2.70; 95% confidence interval 1.54-4.73; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of RSG in superobese patients infers higher risk for organ-space surgical site infection and is associated with prolonged operative time and length of stay. This questions the role of robotics in superobese patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy.

Totally robotic vs hybrid abdominoperineal resection: A retrospective multicenter analysis

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (APR) for low rectal cancers is technically demanding. Robotic assistance may be of help and can be hybrid (HAPR) or totally robotic (RAPR). The present study describes outcomes of robotic APR and compares both approaches.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A multicentric retrospective analysis of rectal cancer patients undergoing either HAPR or RAPR was conducted. Patients' demographics, surgeons' experience, oncologic results, and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-five patients were included, 48 in HAPR group and 77 in RAPR group. Demographics and comorbidities were comparable. Operative time was reduced in RAPR group (266.9 ± 107.8 min vs 318.9 ± 75.1 min, P = .001). RAPR patients were discharged home more frequently (91.18% vs 66.67%, P = .001), and experienced fewer parastomal hernias (3.71% vs 9.86%, P = .001).

CONCLUSION

RAPR is safe and feasible with appropriate oncologic outcomes. Totally robotic approach reduces operative time and may improve functional outcomes.

Systematic review of learning curves in robot-assisted surgery

Background

Increased uptake of robotic surgery has led to interest in learning curves for robot‐assisted procedures. Learning curves, however, are often poorly defined. This systematic review was conducted to identify the available evidence investigating surgeon learning curves in robot‐assisted surgery.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched in February 2018, in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, alongside hand searches of key congresses and existing reviews. Eligible articles were those assessing learning curves associated with robot‐assisted surgery in patients.

Results

Searches identified 2316 records, of which 68 met the eligibility criteria, reporting on 68 unique studies. Of these, 49 assessed learning curves based on patient data across ten surgical specialties. All 49 were observational, largely single‐arm (35 of 49, 71 per cent) and included few surgeons. Learning curves exhibited substantial heterogeneity, varying between procedures, studies and metrics. Standards of reporting were generally poor, with only 17 of 49 (35 per cent) quantifying previous experience. Methods used to assess the learning curve were heterogeneous, often lacking statistical validation and using ambiguous terminology.

Conclusion

Learning curve estimates were subject to considerable uncertainty. Robust evidence was lacking, owing to limitations in study design, frequent reporting gaps and substantial heterogeneity in the methods used to assess learning curves. The opportunity remains for the establishment of optimal quantitative methods for the assessment of learning curves, to inform surgical training programmes and improve patient outcomes.

Clinical practice guidelines for the perioperative nutrition, metabolic, and nonsurgical support of patients undergoing bariatric procedures - 2019 update: cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists

OBJECTIVE

The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPG) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, The Obesity Society, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, the Obesity Medicine Association, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists boards of directors in adherence to the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPG, algorithms, and checklists.

METHODS

Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts.

RESULTS

New or updated topics in this CPG include contextualization in an adiposity-based, chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based, and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current healthcare arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest).

CONCLUSIONS

Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence-based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.

Robotic-Assisted Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Learning Curve Assessment Using Cumulative Sum and Literature Review

Purpose: Robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RARYGB) is a procedure that is used with increasing frequency in the United States. Among other bariatric procedures, RARYGB is a good model for the robotic platform because it allows hand-sewn suturing and energy devices application. The aim of this study was to conduct a literature review of robotic approach in RARYGB, its learning curve using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method, and our experience as Center of Excellence recognized by the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS). Methods: A total of 67 patients were included. Results revealed that the learning curve was achieved after case 11. Eighteen studies were included in the pooled analysis. Results: An increase in the operative time was noted at case 46, in which a second phase was identified. A significant difference between these two phases was found only related to previous bariatric surgery. The outcomes of this series were comparable with the ones available in the literature. Conclusions: The robotic platform is increasing its role in complex procedures such as RARYGB. The hand-sewn technique may offer important advantages in terms of shorter learning curve, reduced conversion rate, and lower leakage rate.

The Results of 100 Robotic Versus 100 Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass Procedures: a Single High Volume Centre Experience

BACKGROUND

The introduction of robotics in bariatric surgery is a novel development since the beginning of this century. The aim of this study is to compare surgical outcome of the robotic gastric bypass with the laparoscopic counterpart.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted to compare the results of 100 fully robotic gastric bypasses (RGB) and 100 laparoscopic gastric bypasses (LGB) performed by a single surgeon. Surgical outcome was analysed by evaluating operation room time and surgical time, morbidity and mortality, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

In the RGB and LGB group, respectively, 92 and 80 % of operated patients were female (p = 0.024). Mean age was 39 (range 20-62, SD 10.21) and 42 years (range 18-65, SD 11.87), respectively (p = 0.158). Mean BMI was 40 (range 35-47, SD 2.66) and 42 (range 35-56, SD 4.75), respectively (p < 0.05). Mean surgical time was 67 (range 39-210, SD 22.46) and 31 min (range 18-62, SD 9.12), respectively (p < 0.05). Mean operation room time was 117 (range 80-257, SD 30.13) and 66 min (range 38-101, SD 12.68), respectively (p < 0.05). The surgery-related 30-day morbidity rate was 5 % in both groups. Major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo class 3-4) was 3 and 1 %, respectively (p = 0.62). There was no mortality. Median hospital stay was two postoperative days in both groups. A learning curve developed after 25 procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

The RGB is a feasible procedure. Although more time is needed, a standardized technique results in fair operation times in the hands of an experienced surgeon.