Robotic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A meta-analysis

Association between hospital participation in Medicare Shared Savings Program and hospital use of robotic surgical approach

BACKGROUND

In 2012, Medicare introduced Shared Savings Program (MSSP) accountable care organizations (ACO) model to improve the value of health care services as a part of the national comprehensive Accountable Care Act. While the effect of the MSSP on primary care has been extensively analyzed, little is known about the effect of the MSSP on cost and quality of surgical care, in particular the use of high-cost robotic surgical modalities. Hospitals routinely market robotic procedures as an indicator of high quality, despite limited evidence of their clinical value. This study examines the relationship between hospital participation in the MSSP and use of robotic surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis using 2016-2019 publicly available data on hospital MSSP participation and use of robotic-assisted procedures in New York State. Using bivariate and multivariate approaches, we identified hospital characteristics associated with the use of robotic technique and hospital quality.

RESULTS

Of the 157 general hospitals in NYS, 83 (53%) offered robotic surgery and 73 (47%) participated in the MSSP. MSSP-affiliated hospitals were more selective in the type of robotic procedures than non-MSSP hospitals, favoring procedures with stronger evidence-base such as prostatectomies. Hospitals that performed robotic surgery selectively had significantly lower spending per patient (p = 0.04). Higher volume of robotic procedures correlated with higher hospital ranking.

CONCLUSIONS

MSSP participation is associated with more selective use of robotic procedures and lower hospital spending. More research is needed to understand the relationship between hospital investments in quality improvement, use of robotic surgery and hospital performance rankings.

Initial experience of benign upper gastrointestinal robotic-assisted surgery: first 200 cases and early postoperative outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Robotic-assisted surgery is an alternative approach to minimally invasive surgery for benign upper gastrointestinal (UGI) conditions and abdominal wall hernia - its application in the United Kingdom is still in the initial phases in many National Health Service (NHS) trusts. We detail the experience of Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust in implementing a robotic-assisted surgery service for benign UGI procedures and abdominal wall hernia repair.

METHODS

The robotic service for benign UGI was established in the trust in February 2022. All theatre staff received online and simulation training before working in the dedicated robotic surgery theatre. Operative timings, surgical outcome measures and patient outcomes including day-case rates were prospectively recorded and analysed to assess the impact of the introduction of this service.

RESULTS

Between February 2022 and June 2023, some 200 robotic-assisted procedures were performed: cholecystectomy (n = 103), hernia repair (n = 74), anti-reflux surgery (n = 9) and Heller's myotomy (n = 14). Median docking times were recorded: cholecystectomy, 9min (4-94min); hernia repair, 10min (4-50min); anti-reflux surgery, 19min (9-37min); and Heller's myotomy, 15min (6-26min). There were no intraoperative complications. Two patients returned to theatre for bile leak following cholecystectomy, presenting on day 2 and day 9 postoperatively.

DISCUSSION

Robotic-assisted benign UGI surgery can be safely performed in a day-case centre and does not impact day-case rates. There were no theatre delays because of prolonged docking times, even in the initial introductory period. There are higher costs associated with robotic-assisted surgery; however, with time and industry development, these are likely to improve.

Single-surgeon training of 14 novice surgeons in robotic cholecystectomy: a study of 300 consecutive cases, assessing training outcomes and surgical performance

Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) is a rapidly evolving field, requiring comprehensive training for widespread adoption. The aim of this study was to analyze the effectiveness of RAS cholecystectomy training in improving the technical skills and confidence of novice surgeons. Furthermore, the study examined the transferability of RAS skills to laparoscopic skills, the role of RAS cholecystectomies in reducing errors and improving patient outcomes, and identified factors that predict a successful transition from traditional laparoscopic surgery to RAS surgery. The RAST curriculum includes multimodal learning content delivered through a cloud-based platform, with three steps: basic training, simulation exercises, and structured on-patient training in the operating room. One general surgeon was trained on the Intuitive Surgical da Vinci system and assisted in performing 10 da Vinci-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomies. In the first 300 patients who underwent robotic cholecystectomy, there were no major complications, conversions to laparoscopy, or open surgeries. The RAST curriculum demonstrates feasibility in providing a comprehensive and effective RAS training experience for surgical residents, reducing the need for extensive travel and high costs. The RAST curriculum is a promising solution for training surgical residents in RAS, with potential for widespread adoption and scalability.

Cholecystectomy with the Hugo™ robotic-assisted surgery system: the first general surgery clinical study in Korea

BACKGROUND

The Hugo™ Robotic-Assisted Surgery (RAS) System is an emergent device in the robotic surgery field. This study aims to describe the first general surgery-focused clinical study in Korea using the novel Hugo™ RAS System.

METHODS

This study was a prospective, single-center, single-arm, confirmatory clinical study conducted at Seoul National University Hospital where 20 cholecystectomies were performed. To evaluate the safety and performance of the Hugo™ RAS System the incidence of conversion to laparoscopy or open surgery, major complication (Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥ III) rate, overall complication rate, readmission rate, and reoperation rate were evaluated. All parameters were assessed within 30 days post-procedure. Any device deficiencies encountered during our initial experience and device data such as setup, console, and operative times were also reported.

RESULTS

We confirmed that our trial achieved the primary objective with a success rate of at least 95%. This was accomplished with no conversions to other types of surgery due to serious system malfunction and with only one major complication within 24 h post-procedure. The 20 consecutively enrolled patients had a median age and BMI of 58 years old and 23.9 kg/m2, respectively. The major complication rate was 10% (2/20 patients), the overall complication rate was 15% (3/20 patients), the readmission rate was 15% (3/20 patients), and the reoperation rate was 0% (0/20 patients). None of the complications were definitively device related. The median setup, console, and operative times were 16, 17, and 55 min, respectively. The device deficiency rate was 15% (3/20 patients), but all device deficiencies were minor, occurred before the first incision, and did not present a risk to the patient.

CONCLUSION

Based on our initial experience with the Hugo™ RAS System, cholecystectomy is feasible and safe. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05715827).

Robotic versus Laparoscopic Emergency and Acute Care Surgery: Redefining Novelty (RLEARN): feasibility and benefit of robotic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis at a level 1 trauma center

Background

This study aims to compare outcomes of robotic cholecystectomy (RC) versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in the setting of a level 1 trauma center.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study of our hospital data (2021-2024) on patients who underwent LC or RC. Using a previously validated intraoperative grading system, four grades of cholecystitis were defined as mild (A), moderate (B), severe (C), and extreme (D). Outcomes were operative times and rates of conversion to open surgery.

Results

In total, 260 patients (n=130 RC and n=130 LC) were included. Patients were primarily female (69.2%), with mean age of 47±18.3 years. The majority of cases had grade B cholecystitis (41.2%). Patients undergoing RC had lower operative times compared with LC in grade B (101.87±17.54 vs 114.96±29.44 min, p=0.003) and grade C (134.68±26.97 vs 152.06±31.3 min, p=0.038). Conversion rate to open cholecystectomy were similar in both groups (p=0.19).

Conclusion

RC had similar results as LC in terms of operative time and in fact has significantly lower operative time in patients with grade B and grade C cholecystitis.

Level of evidence

Level III-retrospective study.

Clinical and socioeconomic factors predicting return-to-work times after cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Cholecystectomy, a type of surgery commonly performed globally, has possible mutual effects on the socioeconomic conditions of different countries due to various postoperative recovery times.

AIMS

This study evaluated the medical and socioeconomic factors affecting delayed return-to-work (RTW) time after elective cholecystectomy.

METHODS

This retrospective study analysed patients who underwent elective cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder diseases from January 2022 to April 2023. The patients' medical and socioeconomic data were collected to investigate the clinical and socioeconomic factors correlated with RTW time of >30 days after surgery.

RESULTS

This study included 180 consecutive patients. Significant correlations were found between delayed RTW time (>30 days) and age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.059, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.008-1.113, P = 0.024), lack of medical insurance (OR: 2.935, 95% CI 1.189-7.249, P = 0.02) and high-intensity labour jobs (OR: 3.649, 95% CI 1.495-8.909, P = 0.004). Patients without medical insurance (26.6 versus 18.9 days) and those with high-intensity labour jobs (23.9 versus 18.8 days) had a higher mean RTW time than those with insurance and a less-intense labour job (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

After cholecystectomy, older age, lack of medical insurance and high-intensity labour job were correlated with a delayed RTW time. Informing patients about their expected RTW time after surgery can help reduce costs.

Incorporating Robotic Cholecystectomy in an Acute Care Surgery Practice Model is Feasible

INTRODUCTION

The role of robotic surgery in the nonelective setting remains poorly defined. Accessibility, patient acuity, and high turn-over may limit its applicability and utilization. The goal is to characterize the role of robotic cholecystectomy (CCY) in a busy acute care surgery (ACS) practice at a quaternary medical center, and compare surgical outcomes and resource utilization between robotic and laparoscopic CCY.

METHODS

Adult patients who underwent robotic (Da Vinci Xi) or laparoscopic CCY between 01/2021-12/2022 by an ACS attending within 1 week of admission were included. Primary outcomes included time from admission to surgery, off hour (weekend and 6p-6a) cases, operation time, and hospital costs, to reflect "feasibility" of robotic compared to laparoscopic CCY. Secondary outcomes encompassed surgery-related outcomes and complications.

RESULTS

The proportion of robotic CCY increased from 5% to 32% within 2 years. In total 361 laparoscopic and 89 robotic CCY were performed. Demographics and gallbladder disease severity were similar. Feasibility measures-operation time, case start time, time from admission to surgery, proportion of off-hour cases, and cost-were comparable between robotic and laparoscopic CCY. There were no differences in surgical complications, common bile duct injury, readmission, or mortality. Conversion to open surgery occurred more often in laparoscopic cases (5% vs 0%, P = .02, OR = 1.05).

DISCUSSION

Robotic CCY is associated with fewer open conversions and otherwise similar outcomes compared to laparoscopic CCY in the non-elective setting. Incorporation of robotic CCY in a busy ACS practice model is feasible with available resources.

Safety of robotic cholecystectomy as index training procedure: the UK experience

AIMS

To evaluate the safety profile of robotic cholecystectomy performed within the United Kingdom (UK) Robotic Hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) training programme.

METHODS

A retrospective evaluation of prospectively collected data from eleven centres participating in the UK Robotic HPB training programme was conducted. All adult patients undergoing robotic cholecystectomy for symptomatic gallstone disease or gallbladder polyp were considered. Bile duct injury, conversion to open procedure, conversion to subtotal cholecystectomy, length of hospital stay, 30-day re-admission, and post-operative complications were the evaluated outcome parameters.

RESULTS

A total of 600 patients were included. The median age was 53 (IQR 65-41) years and the majority (72.7%; 436/600) were female. The main indications for robotic cholecystectomy were biliary colic (55.5%, 333/600), cholecystitis (18.8%, 113/600), gallbladder polyps (7.7%, 46/600), and pancreatitis (6.2%, 37/600). The median length of stay was 0 (IQR 0-1) days. Of the included patients, 88.5% (531/600) were discharged on the day of procedure with 30-day re-admission rate of 5.5% (33/600). There were no bile duct injuries and the rate of conversion to open was 0.8% (5/600) with subtotal cholecystectomy rate of 0.8% (5/600).

CONCLUSION

The current study confirms that robotic cholecystectomy can be safely implemented to routine practice with a low risk of bile duct injury, low bile leak rate, low conversion to open surgery, and low need for subtotal cholecystectomy.

A Case of Robotic Cholecystectomy in a Patient With Decompensated Cirrhosis and Portal Hypertension

In patients with liver cirrhosis, approximately one-third experience pigmented cholelithiasis. In parallel to this, cirrhotics consequently encounter a greater prevalence of acute cholecystitis. Traditionally, the definitive treatment for acute cholecystitis in non-cirrhotic patients is cholecystectomy. However, decompensated cirrhosis and portal hypertension pose a surgical challenge, as these comorbidities increase the risk of postoperative complications such as bleeding, infection, and multi-organ failure. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to consider patient risk factors, anatomy, and acuity of patient cholecystitis on an individual basis and develop a surgical (or non-surgical) plan that minimizes risk to patients with decompensated cirrhosis and portal hypertension. We present the management strategies of a case of a 50-year-old male who presents with a history of decompensated liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension complicated by acute cholecystitis. Upon initial presentation, he was critically ill, and a percutaneous cholecystostomy tube was placed for management and the patient was instructed to follow up in the clinic. Then, the patient later returned to the emergency department with a fever, UTI, and sepsis. At that time, his cholecystostomy tube continued to have bilious drainage and he had tenderness in the right upper quadrant. The decision was made to proceed with surgery. Because of his significant comorbid conditions and underlying cirrhosis, surgery posed an increased risk. For this patient, it was especially important to evaluate the risk of complications and the decision of open vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy. In this patient, robotic-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy was eventually performed. Due to the patient's hepatomegaly, splenomegaly, and portal hypertension, special consideration was needed for trocar placement. In this case, we aim to exemplify that is of utmost importance to consider patient anatomy by using imaging and marking organ borders to inform trocar placement as part of the surgical approach.

Innovations in surgery for gallbladder cancer: A review of robotic surgery as a feasible and safe option

BACKGROUND

This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted surgical techniques in the treatment of gallbladder cancer, comparing it with traditional open and laparoscopic methods.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature searched for comparative analyses of patient outcomes following robotic, open, and laparoscopic surgeries, focusing on oncological results and perioperative benefits.

RESULTS

Five total studies published between 2019 and 2023 were identified. Findings indicate that robotic-assisted surgery for gallbladder cancer is as effective as traditional methods in terms of oncological outcomes, with potential advantages in precision and perioperative recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic surgery offers a viable and potentially advantageous alternative for gallbladder cancer treatment, warranting further research to confirm its benefits and establish comprehensive surgical guidelines.

A Medium-Term Comparison of Quality of Life and Pain After Robotic or Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

INTRODUCTION

We sought to compare medium-term outcomes between robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (RC) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) using validated quality of life (QoL) and pain assessments.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent RC or LC between 2012 and 2017 at a single academic institution were examined. Cases converted to open were excluded. Patients were contacted by telephone in 2019 and completed two standardized surveys to rate their QoL and pain.

RESULTS

Of those screened, 122 (35.8%) completed both surveys. Ninety three (76.2%) underwent RC and 29 (23.8%) underwent LC. The groups (RC versus LC) were similar based on mean age (47.9 versus 45.5 y, P = 0.48), gender (66.7% versus 72.4% female, P = 0.56), race (86.0% White/5.4% Black versus 72.4% White/13.8% Black, P = 0.2), insurance status (98.9% versus 100.0% insured, P = 0.58), median body mass index (31.8 versus 31.3, P = 0.43), and median Charlson Comorbidity Index (1 versus 0, P = 0.14). Fewer RC patients had a history of steroid use compared to LC (16.1% versus 34.5%, P = 0.03). No overall significant difference in QoL was demonstrated. LC group had higher severity of "tiring-exhausting pain" (P = 0.04), "electric-shock pain" (P = 0.003), and "shooting pain" (P = 0.05). The "overall intensity" of pain in the "gallbladder region" between the groups was similar at the time of follow-up (P = 0.31).

CONCLUSIONS

QoL over 2-7 y following time of surgery is comparable for robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomies. The laparoscopic approach may be associated with a higher severity of subset categories of pain, but overall pain between the two approaches is comparable.

Full robotic cholecystectomy: first worldwide experiences with HUGO RAS surgical platform

BACKGROUND

The Hugo RAS™ system (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA), approved for gynaecological and urological procedures, has been recently certified for the use in few general surgeries. Only bariatric and colorectal procedures have been described so far.

METHODS

Here, we report the first worldwide experience with three cases of full-robotic cholecystectomies with the Hugo RAS™ system.

RESULTS

A description of the operative room setup, of the docking angles and details of the procedures is reported. Docking time was 12, 10, and 6 min, respectively. The total operative time was 105 min in the first case, 100 min in the second and 88 in the third case. Intra- and post-operative courses were uneventful.

CONCLUSIONS

With this pre-defined set up, the innovative conformation of Hugo RAS™ system can safely allow performing full robotic cholecystectomy avoiding the need for additional ports.

Feasibility of robotic cholecystectomy at an academic center with a young robotic surgery program: a retrospective cohort study with umbrella review

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has been standard of care for surgical treatment of benign gallbladder pathology for decades. With the advent of robotic surgical technology, robotic cholecystectomy (RC) has gained attention as an alternative to conventional laparoscopy. This study introduces a single-surgeon experience with laparoscopic versus robotic cholecystectomy and an umbrella systematic review of the outcomes of both approaches. A retrospective chart review was performed at a single institution on a prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder pathology. An umbrella systematic review was conducted using PRISMA methodology. A total of 103 patients were identified; 61 patients underwent LC and 42 underwent RC. In the RC cohort, 17 cases were completed using a four-port technique while 25 were completed using a three-port technique. Patients undergoing RC were older compared to the LC group (44.78 vs 57.02 years old; p < 0.001) and exhibited lower body mass index (29.37 vs 32.37 kg/m2, p = 0.040). No statistically significant difference in operative time or need for postoperative ERCP was noted. Neither this series nor the umbrella systematic review revealed significant differences in conversion to open surgery or readmissions between the LC and RC cohorts. Three-port RC was associated with reduced operative time compared to four-port RC (101.28 vs 150.76 min; p < 0.001). Robotic cholecystectomy is feasible and safe at a young robotic surgery program in an academic center setting and comparable to laparoscopic cholecystectomy clinical outcomes.

Clinical status and future prospects of single-incision robotic-assisted surgery: a review

Since the advent of conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery, the prosperity of minimally invasive surgery has been thriving on the advancement of endoscopic techniques. Cosmetic superiority, recovery benefits, and noninferior surgical outcomes weigh single-incision laparoscopic surgery as a promising modality. Although there are surgical challenges posed by steep learning curve and technological difficulties, such as instruments collision, triangulation loss and limited retraction, the establishment of robotic surgical platform as a solution to all is inspiring. Furthermore, with enhanced instrument maneuverability and stability, robotic ergonomic innovations adopt the advantages of single-incision laparoscopic surgery and surmount its recognized barriers by introducing a novel combination, single-incision robotic-assisted surgery. As was gradually diffused in general surgery and other specialties, single-incision robotic-assisted surgery manifests privileges in noninferior clinical outcomes an satisfactory cosmetic effect among strictly selected patients, and has the potential of a preferable surgical option for minimally invasive surgery.

A retrospective study of laparoscopic, robotic-assisted, and open emergent/urgent cholecystectomy based on the PINC AI Healthcare Database 2017-2020

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC) is becoming increasingly common, but the outcomes of emergent/urgent robotic-assisted cholecystectomies compared to emergent laparoscopic (LC) and open cholecystectomies (OC) remain understudied.

METHODS

The PINC AI Healthcare Database was queried to identify adults who underwent emergent or urgent (Em-Ur) cholecystectomy between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2020. Immediate postoperative and 30-day outcomes were identified including intraoperative complications, transfusion, conversion, postoperative complication, and hospital length of stay. Propensity score matching was done to compare outcomes between Em-Ur robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open cholecystectomies Subgroup analyses were performed comparing RAC done with and without fluorescent imaging as well as comparing RAC and LC performed for patients with class 3 obesity (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2).

RESULTS

RAC Em-Ur cholecystectomies are being performed with increasing frequency and is the most utilized modality for patients with class 3 obesity. There was no difference in intraoperative complications (0.3%), bile duct injury (0.2%), or postoperative outcomes between RAC and LC. LC had significantly shorter operating room times (96 min (75,128)) compared to RAC (120 min (90,150)). There was a significant lower rate of conversion to open in RAC (1.9%) relative to LC (3.2%) in both the overall population and the class 3 obesity sub-analysis (RAC-2.6% vs. LC-4.4%). There was no difference in outcomes in robotic-assisted cholecystectomies done with and without fluorescent imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

A comparison of propensity score-matched cohorts of emergent/urgent robotic-assisted and laparoscopic cholecystectomy indicates that robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is a safe alternative to laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and that both have superior outcomes to open cholecystectomies.

Robotic single-site cholecystectomy is better in reducing postoperative pain than single-incision and conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

To compare the short-term outcomes of robotic single-site cholecystectomy (RSSC) with single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CMLC), focusing on postoperative pain outcomes.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study included consecutive patients with benign gallbladder disease who underwent cholecystectomy by a single surgeon between June 2019 and December 2021. Exclusion criteria were acute cholecystitis (AC) and other combined surgeries. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed between the RSSC and SILC or CMLC.

RESULTS

Of the 157 patients included, 39 (24.8%) underwent RSSC, 32 (20.4%) underwent SILC, and 86 (54.8%) underwent CMLC. In a propensity score-matched cohort between RSSC and SILC (32 patients in each group), the number of additional analgesic injections was significantly lower in the RSSC group than in the SILC group (0.7 vs. 1.3, p = 0.002), and postoperative pain scores were also significantly lower at 6 h (2.8 vs. 3.6, p = 0.004) and 24 h (2.6 vs. 3.3, p = 0.021) after surgery in the RSSC group than in the SILC group. In a propensity score-matched cohort between RSSC and CMLC (23 patients in each group), the number of additional analgesic injections was significantly lower in the RSSC group than in the CMLC group (0.7 vs. 1.3, p = 0.005), and postoperative pain scores were also significantly lower at 6 h after surgery (2.9 vs. 3.7, p = 0.025) in the RSSC group than in the CMLC group.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that RSSC is helpful in reducing postoperative pain and the use of additional analgesics compared to both SILC and CMLC.

Initial 30 cholecystectomy procedures performed with the Senhance digital laparoscopy system

PURPOSE

The Senhance digital laparoscopy system (SDLS) is a novel platform developed for digitization in endoscopic surgery. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the short-term outcome in the initial 30 consecutive patients.

METHODS

SDLS cholecystectomies were performed in 30 consecutive patients (13 male, 17 female) by a single surgeon from September 2020 to March 2022. The patients' median age (range) was 77.5 (27-82) years, and median body mass index was 23.3 (19-38) kg/m² . Four trocars were used, three of which were docked to manipulator arms of the SDLS. Surgical procedures performed with the SDLS were almost the same as those by conventional surgery.

RESULTS

Median docking time, cockpit time, and operation time in minutes were 4 (3-13), 34 (13-81), and 69 (47-201), respectively. Operation time after the sixth case tended to shorten compared with that for the initial five cases. Three cases (10%) were converted to conventional laparoscopic surgery due to severe cholecystitis, but none required conversion to open surgery. Postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥II were not observed.

CONCLUSION

This retrospective study showed that cholecystectomy using the SDLS appeared to be safe and feasible in limited cases without severe inflammation.

A systematic review of robot-assisted cholecystectomy to examine the quality of reporting in relation to the IDEAL recommendations: systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Robotic cholecystectomy (RC) is a recent innovation in minimally invasive gallbladder surgery. The IDEAL (idea, development, exploration, assessment, long-term study) framework aims to provide a safe method for evaluating innovative procedures. This study aimed to understand how RC was introduced, in accordance with IDEAL guidelines.

METHODS

Systematic searches were used to identify studies reporting RC. Eligible studies were classified according to IDEAL stage and data were collected on general study characteristics, patient selection, governance procedures, surgeon/centre expertise, and outcome reporting.

RESULTS

Of 1425 abstracts screened, 90 studies were included (5 case reports, 38 case series, 44 non-randomized comparative studies, and 3 randomized clinical trials). Sixty-four were single-centre and 15 were prospective. No authors described their work in the context of IDEAL. One study was classified as IDEAL stage 1, 43 as IDEAL 2a, 43 as IDEAL 2b, and three as IDEAL 3. Sixty-four and 51 provided inclusion and exclusion criteria respectively. Ethical approval was reported in 51 and conflicts of interest in 34. Only 21 reported provision of training for surgeons in RC. A total of 864 outcomes were reported; 198 were used in only one study. Only 30 reported a follow-up interval which, in 13, was 1 month or less.

CONCLUSION

The IDEAL framework was not followed during the adoption of RC. Few studies were conducted within a research setting, many were retrospective, and outcomes were heterogeneous. There is a need to implement appropriate tools to facilitate the incremental evaluation and reporting of surgical innovation.

Cost analysis of robotic assisted general surgery cases in a single academic institution

Laparoscopy is currently the standard approach for minimally invasive general surgery procedures. However, robotic surgery is now increasingly being used in general surgery. Robotic surgery provides several advantages such as 3D-visualization, articulated instruments, improved ergonomics, and increased dexterity, but is also associated with an increased overall cost which limits its widespread use. In our institution, the robotic assisted approach is frequently used for the performance of general surgery cases including inguinal hernias, cholecystectomies and paraesophageal hernia (PEH) repairs. The primary aim of the study was to evaluate the differences in cost between a robotic and laparoscopic approach for the above-mentioned cases. With IRB approval, we conducted a retrospective cost analysis of patients undergoing inguinal hernia repairs, cholecystectomies and PEH repairs between June 2018 and November 2020. Patients who had a concomitant procedure, a revisional surgery, or bilateral inguinal hernia repair were excluded from the study. Cost analysis was performed using a micro-costing approach. Statistical significance was denoted by p < 0.05. There were no differences among the different groups in relation to age, gender, ethnicity, and BMI. The overall cost of the robotic (R-) approach compared to a laparoscopic (L-) approach was significantly lower for cholecystectomy ($3,199.96 vs $4019.89, p < 0.05). For inguinal hernia repairs and PEH repairs without mesh, we found no significant difference in overall costs between the R- and L- approach (R- $3835.06 vs L- $3783.50, p = 0.69) and (R- $6852.41 vs L- $6819.69, p = 0.97), respectively. However, the overall cost of PEH with mesh was significantly higher for the R- group compared to the L- group (R- $7,511.09 vs L- $6,443.32, p < 0.05). Based on our institutional cost data, use of a robotic approach when performing certain general surgery cases does not seem to be cost prohibitive.

Robot-Assisted General Surgery Procedures at the Veterans Health Administration: A Comparison of Surgical Techniques

INTRODUCTION

The use of the robot in general surgery has exploded in the last decade. The Veterans Health Administration presents a unique opportunity to study differences between surgical approaches due to the ability to control for health system and insurance variability. This study compares clinical outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic or open techniques for three general surgery procedures.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study using the Veterans Affair Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Operative time, length of stay, and complications were compared for cholecystectomy (robot-assisted versus laparoscopic), ventral, and inguinal hernia repair (robot-assisted versus laparoscopic or open) from 2015 to 2019.

RESULTS

More than 80,000 cases were analyzed (21,652 cholecystectomy, 9214 ventral hernia repairs, and 51,324 inguinal hernia repairs). Median operative time was longer for all robot-assisted approaches as compared to laparoscopic or open techniques with the largest difference seen between open and robot-assisted primary ventral hernia repair (unadjusted difference of 93 min, P < 0.001). Median length of stay was between 1 and 4 d and significantly for robot-assisted ventral hernia repairs (versus open, P < 0.01; versus lap for recurrent hernia, P < 0.05). Specific postoperative outcomes of interest were overall low with few differences between techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

While the robotic platform was associated with longer operative time, these findings must be interpreted in the context of a learning curve and indications for use (i.e., use of the robot for technically challenging cases). Our findings suggest that at the Veterans Health Administration, the robot is as safe a platform for common general surgery procedures as traditional approaches. Future studies should focus on patient-centered outcomes including pain and cosmesis.

Robotic cholecystectomy using Senhance robotic platform versus laparoscopic conventional cholecystectomy: a propensity score analysis

INTRODUCTION

Our study objective was to evaluate differences in intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of robotic cholecystectomy (RC) using Senhance robotic platform vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective case - matched analysis was performed for all patients who underwent cholecystectomy from November 2018 to November 2019. RC cases were matched to LC. RC was performed using Senhance robotic platform. Propensity score matching analysis with a ratio of 1:1 (RC: LC) was performed. The groups were matched according to age, sex, body mass index (BMI). All procedures were performed by two same experienced robotic surgeons at Klaipeda University Hospital (O.D. and V.E.). Age, BMI, operative time, blood loss and length of hospital stay were collected and analysed between those patient groups.

RESULTS

A total of 40 patients underwent RC or LC. There were no statistical differences between groups in concern of length of hospital stay, blood loss or complications. There were no bile duct injuries in either group, no intraoperative complications, no conversions either RC to LC or LC to open surgery. One patient in robotic group was reoperated on postoperative day 5 regarding sub-hepatic haematoma. The only statistical significance was in operative time (p < .05) which was longer in RC group. Median docking time was 12 min (range 5-23).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic cholecystectomy using Senhance robotic platform appears to be safe in comparison with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy might be feasible in gaining robotic surgery skills.

Initiation and feasibility of a multi-specialty minimally invasive surgical programme using a novel robotic system: A case series

INTRODUCTION

There are a number of small case series examining new robotic surgical systems, but this is the first large case series assessing the feasibility of the Versius® system from CMR Surgical (1 Evolution Business Park, Cambridge, UK) in a multi-specialty setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients undergoing Versius®-assisted surgery in a previously robot-naïve centre were consented for collection of data on demographics, pre-, intra-, and postoperative outcomes. Data collection was performed prospectively from the start of the robotic surgical programme.

RESULTS

160 operations were performed over a 19-month period, including 68 colorectal, 60 gynaecology, and 32 general surgery cases. The conversion rate to open surgery was 4.4% for colorectal, and 0% for gynaecology and general surgery. Median length of stay was 6 days for colorectal, 1 day for gynaecology, and 0 days for general surgery. Other outcomes were comparable to existing literature for robotic assisted surgery.

CONCLUSION

The Versius® system is safe and feasible for use in a multi-specialty minimally invasive surgery programme, including colorectal, general surgical & gynaecological cases, and operative volume can be safely and easily scaled up in a district general hospital setting without prior robotic surgical experience.

Robotic cholecystectomy with a new port placement-is it really beneficial?

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the effect of robotic cholecystectomy (RC) with a new port placement versus that of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) on surgical pain and postoperative complications.

METHODS

We prospectively collected medical data from 100 patients who underwent cholecystectomy (RC = 50, LC = 50) from March 2017 to January 2019. In the RC group, ports were positioned in the left-lower, mid-lower, and umbilical areas. In the LC group, ports were placed in the xiphoid, right-upper, and umbilical areas.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics were similar between the two groups. Pain levels at 2, 4, and 8 h were significantly lower in the RC group than in the LC group (p = 0.04, 0.02, and 0.02, respectively). The LC group received more analgesics after surgery (RC = 0.3 ± 0.5 vs. LC = 0.7 ± 0.9, p = 0.03). However, the total medical cost was significantly higher in the RC group (RC = 7355.2 ± 1270.9 USD vs. LC = 4814.8 ± 1572.5 USD, p < 0.01). Mean operative time, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications were not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Regardless of the surgical procedure, postoperative complications were similar. RC with the new port placement can be recommended for patients who are more concerned about postoperative pain, incision, and hospital stay than surgical cost.

Robotic Resection of Gallbladder Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Comparative Study to Open Resection

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery is gaining support for resection of gallbladder cancer (GBC). This study aims to compare operative and early outcomes of robotic resection (RR) to open resection (OR) from a single institution performing a high volume of robotic HPB surgery.

METHODS

Twenty patients with GBC underwent RR from January 2013 to August 2019. Outcomes were compared to a historical control of 23 patients with OR. Radical cholecystectomy for suspected GBC and completion operations for incidental GBC after routine cholecystectomy were both included.

RESULTS

Robotic resection had lower blood loss compared to OR (150 vs 350 mL, P = .002) and shorter postoperative length of stay (2.5 vs 6 days, P < .001), while median operative time was similar (193 vs 208 min, P = .604). There were no statistical differences in 30-day major complications or readmissions. No 30-day mortalities occurred. There was no statistical difference in survival trend (P = .438) or median lymph node harvest (5 vs 3, P = .189) for RR compared to OR.

CONCLUSION

Robotic resection of GBC is safe and efficient, with lower length of hospital stay and blood loss compared to OR. Technical benefits of robotic-assisted surgery may prove advantageous though larger studies are still needed.

The Early (2009-2017) Experience With Robot-assisted Cholecystectomy in New York State

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine real-life patterns of care and patient outcomes associated with robot-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC) in New York State (NYS).

BACKGROUND

Although robotic assistance may offer some technological advantages, RACs are associated with higher procedural costs and longer operating times compared to traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LCs). Evidence on long-term patient outcomes after RAC from large population-based datasets remains limited and inconsistent.

METHODS

Using NYS inpatient and ambulatory surgery data from the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (2009-2017), we conducted bivariate and multivariate analyses to examine patterns of utilization, complications, and secondary procedures following cholecystectomies.

RESULTS

Among 299,306 minimally invasive cholecystectomies performed in NYS between 2009 and 2017, one thousand one hundred eighteen (0.4%) were robot-assisted. Compared to those undergoing LC, RAC patients were older, travelled further for surgery, and were more likely to have public insurance and preoperative comorbidities. RAC versus LC patients were more significantly likely to have conversions to open procedure (4.9% vs 2.8%), bile duct injuries (1.3% vs 0.4%), and major reconstructive interventions (0.6% vs 0.1%), longer median length of stay (3 vs 1 day), readmissions (7.3% vs 4.4%), and higher 12-month post-index surgery hospital charges (P < 0.01 for all estimates). Other postoperative complications decreased over time for LC but remained unchanged for RAC patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving RAC in NYS experienced higher rates of complications compared to LC patients. Addressing patient-, surgeon-, and system-level factors associated with intra/postoperative complications and applying recently promulgated safe cholecystectomy strategies coupled with advanced imaging modalities like fluorescence cholangiography to RAC may improve patient outcomes.

Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of robot-assisted cholecystectomy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Rapid adoption of robotic-assisted general surgery procedures, particularly for cholecystectomy, continues while questions remain about its benefits and utility. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of robot-assisted cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease as compared with the laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

A literature search was performed from January 2010 to March 2020, and a narrative analysis was performed as studies were heterogeneous.

RESULTS

Of 887 articles screened, 44 met the inclusion criteria (range 20-735,537 patients). Four were randomized controlled trials, and four used propensity-matching. There were variable comparisons between operative techniques with only 19 out of 44 studies comparing techniques using the same number of ports. Operating room time was longer for the robot-assisted technique in the majority of studies (range 11-55 min for 22 studies, p < 0.05; 15 studies showed no difference; two studies showed shorter laparoscopic times), while conversion rates and intraoperative complications were not different. No differences were detected for the length of stay, surgical site infection, or readmissions. Across studies comparing single-port robot-assisted to multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy, there was a higher rate of incisional hernia; however, no differences were noted when comparing single-port robot-assisted to single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical outcomes were similar for benign, elective gallbladder disease for robot-assisted compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Overall, the rates of complications were low. More high-quality studies are needed as the robot-assisted technique expands to more complex gallbladder disease, where its utility may prove increasingly beneficial.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020156945.

Top 100 most-cited original articles, systematic reviews/meta-analyses in robotic surgery: A scientometric study

The aim of this study was to explore and analyze the main features of the top 100 most-cited original articles, systematic reviews (SRs)/meta-analyses (MAs) in the field of robotic surgery, through scientometric analysis. VOSviewer and Excel 2019 were employed to conduct this scientometric study. We found that the majority of original articles (72/100) were published during the 2000s, while the majority of the top 100 most-cited SRs/MAs (91/100) during the 2010s. The USA was the most dominant country (n = 78), Henry Ford Health System was the most productive institution (n = 10), and Menon M was the largest contributing first author (n = 5) of the top 100 most-cited original articles. The USA was the most dominant country (n = 33), University of Padua was the most productive institution (n = 9), and Ficarra V was the largest contributing first author (n = 4) of the top 100 most-cited SRs/MAs. The top 100 most-cited original articles in robotic surgery have focused on the feasibility, outcomes and learning curve of robotic surgery for various neoplasms and cancers. The top 100 most-cited SRs/MAs have focused on the differences between robotic surgery and other types of surgery, with respect to the learning curve, costs, outcomes and experience in treating neoplasms, cancer and other diseases. In the future, the formation of cross-institutional and cross-disciplinary cooperation teams should be promoted and corresponding regulations and standards for specific diseases should be developed to regulate and promote the development of robotic surgery.

Operating costs, fiscal impact, value analysis and guidance for the routine use of robotic technology in abdominal surgical procedures

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to define the value, cost, and fiscal impact of robotic-assisted procedures in abdominal surgery and provide clinical guidance for its routine use.

METHODS

34,984 patients who underwent an elective cholecystectomy, colectomy, inguinal hernia repair, hysterectomy, or appendectomy over a 24-month period were analyzed by age, BMI, risk class, operating time, LOS and readmission rate. Average Direct and Total Cost per Case (ADC, TCC) and Net Margin per Case (NM) were produced for each surgical technique, i.e., open, laparoscopic, and robotic assisted (RA).

RESULTS

All techniques were shown to have similar clinical outcomes. 9412 inguinal herniorrhaphy were performed (48% open with $2138 ADC, 29% laparoscopy with $3468 ADC, 23% RA with $6880 ADC); 8316 cholecystectomies (94% laparoscopy with $2846 ADC, 4.4% RA with a $7139 ADC, 16% open with a $3931 ADC); 3432 colectomies (42% open with a $12,849 ADC, 38% laparoscopy with a $10,714, 20% RA with a $15,133); 12,614 hysterectomies [42% RA with a $8213 Outpatient (OP) ADC, 39% laparoscopy $5181 OP ADC, 19% open $4894 OP ADC]. Average Global NM is - 1% for RA procedures and only positive with commercial payors.

CONCLUSION

RA techniques do not produce significant clinical enhancements than similar surgical techniques with identical outcomes while their costs are much higher. The produced value analysis does not support the routine use of RA techniques for inguinal hernia repair and cholecystectomy. RA techniques for hysterectomies and colectomies are also performed at much higher cost than open and laparoscopic techniques, should only be routinely used with appropriate clinical justification and by cost efficient surgical providers.

Outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease in Veteran patients

The robotic platform for cholecystectomy has been extensively studied in comparison to its laparoscopic counterpart with acceptable outcomes. However, wide acceptance of a robotic approach to cholecystectomy has been limited by increased operative room (OR) times and substantially higher cost. This is a single-institution retrospective review of Veteran patients presenting for elective laparoscopic (LC) and robotic (RC) cholecystectomies for benign biliary disease at the Dallas VA Medical Center. The primary goal was to interrogate 30-day morbidity as well as operative room times, estimated blood loss (EBL), hospital length of stay (LOS), and conversion rates. The entire cohort included 612 patients (age = 55.1 ± 12.9 years, men = 77.9%, BMI = 31.2 ± 6.3 kg/m²) undergoing elective cholecystectomy (LC = 441 and RC = 171) for benign biliary disease (biliary colic = 78.8%, history of biliary pancreatitis = 7.8%, history of cholecystitis = 5.7%). Univariate analysis comparing LC and RC showed the two groups to be of similar age (55.4 ± 12.4 vs. 54.4 ± 14.2 years; p = 0.4), male gender (79.4% vs. 74.3%, p = 0.2), and BMI (31.1 ± 6.4 vs. 31.5 ± 6.3 kg/m²; p = 0.5). Except for dyslipidemia (LC = 48.3% vs. RC = 36.8%; p = 0.01), both groups had the same rate of co-morbid conditions. ASA level III and IV (LC = 60.1 vs. RC = 69.0%, p = 0.04) was higher in the RC group. Both groups underwent surgical intervention for similar indications (biliary colic LC = 80.5% vs. RC = 74.3; p = 0.1). Hospital LOS (1.7 ± 3.2 vs. 0.3 ± 0.9 days, p < 0.001), EBL (32.3 ± 52.3 vs. 17.0 ± 43.1; p = 0.001), and conversion to open (6.6% vs. 0.6%, p = 0.001) were all superior with the robotic platform. Thirty-day overall morbidity (9.8% vs. 12.3%, p = 0.4), skin-to-skin OR time (84.5 ± 33.5 vs. 88.0 ± 35.3 min, p = 0.2), and total OR time (129.2 ± 36.8 vs. 129.7 ± 39.7, p = 0.9) were similar between the LC and RC groups. Despite being older and having more comorbidities, Veteran patients undergoing robotic cholecystectomy experienced equivalent OR time and a moderate improvement in conversion rate, EBL, and hospital LOS compared to those undergoing conventional laparoscopy, therein demonstrating the safety and efficacy of the robotic platform for this patient population.

First in-human experience with a novel robotic platform and Magnetic Surgery System

BACKGROUND

Magnetic technologies have been introduced to reduce invasiveness of surgical procedures. This study was aimed to analyse the performance of a novel combined magnetic-robotic controller as an enhanced accessory to the Magnetic Surgical System in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

METHODS

This was a prospective study of 10 consecutive patients undergoing LC with this novel surgical system.

RESULTS

Ten patients were included, nine were female. The mean age was 30.3 ± 9 years. All patients had chronic cholecystitis. Procedures were completed successfully. The median operative time was 50 ± 11 min. The system performed effectively in all cases with no need of additional interventions. There were no device-related complications or side effects. All patients were discharged the same day. Recovery was uneventful during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the first in-human successful performance of surgeries utilizing a novel combination of magnetic and robotic technologies in one integrated system.

Robotic versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Case-Control Outcome Analysis and Surgical Resident Training Implications

Background

The robotic approach in surgery is becoming more widely used in many subspecialties. Robot-assisted laparoscopic procedures provide potential improvements in clinical outcomes due to improved visualization and enhanced surgical ergonomics. In this study, we measured and compared outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy with the conventional laparoscopic technique, as well as the implications for the training of surgical residents.

Method

We compared a total of 244 patients undergoing minimally invasive cholecystectomies performed by one surgeon between July 2013 and June 2016 examining relevant clinical outcomes including operative room (OR) time, length of hospital stay (LOS), readmission to the hospital, post-operative emergency department (ED) visits, and post-operative pain between laparoscopic single-incision cholecystectomy and robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A chi-square test and Student’s t-test were used to compare these variables between the two groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used using gender, age, and body mass index (BMI) as variables.

Results

From the total number of procedures of 244, 144 were included in the laparoscopic group and 100 in the robot-assisted group. The robot-assisted patients had a shorter post-operative LOS (mean: 0.8 vs. 1.6 days; p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in the OR time (mean: 64.8 vs. 65.0 minutes; p = 0.945), readmissions (4.0% vs. 3.5%; p = 0.830), post-operative ED visits (7.0% vs. 7.6%; p = 0.851), or post-operative pain (13.0% vs. 21.3%; p= 0.137). Robotic cholecystectomy patients were younger (mean: 46 vs. 52 years; p = 0.023) and had lower BMIs (mean: 31 vs. 33; p = 0.038). Because of these differences, we compared the two groups using PSM that confirmed the shorter LOS in the robotic group (mean: 0.9 vs. 1.9; p = 0.009).

Conclusions

These results demonstrate that robotic cholecystectomies can reduce LOS for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, without increasing OR time. Increased surgeon experience with robotic procedures and improved OR efficiency will allow greater opportunities for resident participation. Robotic training curricula need to be employed and objectively evaluated to improve surgical resident skill acquisition and provide earlier and progressive clinical participation in robotic procedures.

Treatment of Acute Cholecystitis: Do Medicaid and Non-Medicaid Enrolled Patients Receive the Same Care?

BACKGROUND

Nationally, Medicaid enrollees with emergency surgical conditions experience worse outcomes overall when compared with privately insured patients. The goal of this study is to investigate disparities in the treatment of cholecystitis based on insurance type and to identify contributing factors.

METHODS

Adults with cholecystitis at a safety-net hospital in Central Massachusetts from 2017-2018 were included. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were compared based on Medicaid enrollment status (Medicare excluded). Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare the frequency of surgery, time to surgery (TTS), length of stay (LOS), and readmission rates between groups.

RESULTS

The sample (n = 203) included 69 Medicaid enrollees (34%), with a mean age of 44.4 years. Medicaid enrollees were younger (p = 0.0006), had lower levels of formal education (high school diploma attainment, p < 0.0001), were more likely to be unmarried (p < 0.0001), Non-White (p = 0.0012), and require an interpreter (p < 0.0001). Patients in both groups experienced similar rates of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, TTS, and LOS; however, Medicaid enrollees experienced more readmissions within 30 days of discharge (30.4% vs 17.9%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Despite anticipated population differences, the treatment of acute cholecystitis was similar between Medicaid and Non-Medicaid enrollees, with the exception of readmission. Further research is needed to identify patient, provider, and/or population factors driving this disparity.

General surgery training in the era of robotic surgery: a qualitative analysis of perceptions from resident and attending surgeons

BACKGROUND

The use of the surgical robot has increased annually since its introduction, especially in general surgery. Despite the tremendous increase in utilization, there are currently no validated curricula to train residents in robotic surgery, and the effects of robotic surgery on general surgery residency training are not well defined. In this study, we aim to explore the perceptions of resident and attending surgeons toward robotic surgery education in general surgery residency training.

METHODS

We performed a qualitative thematic analysis of in-person, one-on-one, semi-structured interviews with general surgery residents and attending surgeons at a large academic health system. Convenient and purposeful sampling was performed in order to ensure diverse demographics, experiences, and opinions were represented. Data were analyzed continuously, and interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was reached, which occurred after 20 residents and seven attendings.

RESULTS

All interviewees agreed that dual consoles are necessary to maximize the teaching potential of the robotic platform, and the importance of simulation and simulators in robotic surgery education is paramount. However, further work to ensure proper access to simulation resources for residents is necessary. While most recognize that bedside-assist skills are essential, most think its educational value plateaus quickly. Lastly, residents believe that earlier exposure to robotic surgery is necessary and that almost every case has a portion that is level-appropriate for residents to perform on the robot.

CONCLUSIONS

As robotic surgery transitions from novelty to ubiquity, the importance of effective general surgery robotic surgery training during residency is paramount. Through in-depth interviews, this study provides examples of effective educational tools and techniques, highlights the importance of simulation, and explores opinions regarding the role of the resident in robotic surgery education. We hope the insights gained from this study can be used to develop and/or refine robotic surgery curricula.

Making the Jump: A Qualitative Analysis on the Transition From Bedside Assistant to Console Surgeon in Robotic Surgery Training

OBJECTIVE

To determine barriers associated with the transition from bedside assistant to console surgeon for general surgery residents in the era of robotic surgery in general surgery training.

DESIGN

Qualitative thematic analysis using one-on-one interviews of general surgery residents and attendings conducted between June 2018 and February 2019.

SETTING

An urban, academic, multihospital general surgery residency program with a robust robotic surgery program.

PARTICIPANTS

Convenient and purposeful sampling was performed to ensure a variety of resident graduate-years and attending subspecialties were represented. Sample size was determined by data saturation, which occurred after 20 resident and 7 attending interviews.

RESULTS

Residents identified the low volume of general surgery robotic cases, the infrequency of exposure to robotic surgery, and attending comfort with robotic surgery (and with teaching on the robot) as potential barriers in the transition from bedside assistant to console surgeon. Residents had to find a replacement bedside assistant in order to be the console surgeon, which was challenging. In addition, residents felt that the current culture surrounding robotic surgery is very hierarchal, limiting their exposure. Attendings' trust in the residents' console skills was a major determining factor in allowing residents on the console.

CONCLUSIONS

Most robotic surgery education curricula are sequential, requiring the resident to progress from bedside assistant to console surgeon. Unfortunately, there are many potential barriers for residents in the transition from bedside assistant to console surgeon. Some barriers apply to general surgery training overall, but are amplified in robotic surgery, while others are unique to robotic surgery education. Recognition of, and rectifying, these barriers may increase resident participation as the console surgeon.

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery, an emerging technology, has some potential advantages in many complicated endoscopic procedures compared with laparoscopic surgery. But robot-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC) is still a controversial issue on its comparative merit compared with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of RAC compared with LC for benign gallbladder disease.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases (from their inception to December 2017) to obtain comparative studies assessing the safety and efficacy between RAC and LC. The quality of the literature was assessed, and the data analyzed using R software, random effects models were applied.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies, including 5 RCTs and 21 NRCSs (3 prospective plus 18 retrospective), were included. A total of 4004 patients were included, of which 1833 patients (46%) underwent RAC and 2171 patients (54%) underwent LC. No significant differences were found in intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, readmission rate, hospital stay, estimated blood loss, and conversion rate between RAC and LC groups. However, RAC was related to longer operative time compared with LC (MD = 12.04 min, 95% CI 7.26-16.82) in RCT group, which was consistent with NRCS group; RAC also had a higher rate of incisional hernia in NRCS group (RR = 3.06, 95% CI 1.42-6.57), and one RCT reported that RAC was similar to LC (RR = 7.00, 95% CI 0.38-129.84).

CONCLUSIONS

The RAC was not found to be more effective or safer than LC for benign gallbladder diseases, which indicated that RAC is a developing procedure instead of replacing LC at once. Given the higher costs, the current evidence is in favor of LC in cholecystectomy.