National trends and outcomes of inpatient robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Clinical Outcomes of Laparoscopic vs Robotic-Assisted Cholecystectomy in Acute Care Surgery

Importance

The use of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy in acute care surgery is increasing, but its safety and efficacy compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy remain unclear.

Objective

To compare clinical outcomes and bile duct injury rates between robotic-assisted cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute care surgery.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a retrospective cohort study using patient data from a commercial claims and encounter database from 2016 to 2021. Included in the study were adult patients undergoing robotic-assisted cholecystectomy or laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute care surgery. Data were analyzed from January to October 2024.

Exposures

Robotic-assisted or laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute care surgery.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was bile duct injury.

Results

A total of 844 428 patients (mean [SD] age, 45.6 [12.5] years; 547 665 female [64.9%]) were included in this analysis. After propensity score matching, robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (n = 35 037) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (n = 35 037) had similar bile duct injury rates (0.37% [128 of 35 037] vs 0.39% [138 of 35 037]; odds ratio [OR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.73-1.18; P = .54). Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy had higher major postoperative complications (8.37% [2934 of 35 037] vs 5.50% [1926 of 35 037]; OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.48-1.67; P < .001), more postoperative drain use (0.63% [219 of 35 037] vs 0.48% [132 of 35 037]; OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.34-2.07; P < .001), and longer median (IQR) hospital length of stay (3 [2-4] days vs 2 [1-4] days; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this large, propensity-matched cohort analysis of acute care surgery cholecystectomy, robotic-assisted and laparoscopic cholecystectomy had similar bile duct injury rates, but robotic-assisted cholecystectomy was associated with higher postoperative complications, longer hospital stays, and increased drain use. Further research is needed to optimize the use of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy for acute gallbladder disease. These findings suggest that, under current practice conditions, robotic-assisted cholecystectomy may not offer clear benefits compared with the standard, established laparoscopic cholecystectomy approach.

Implementation of a Robotic Surgical Program With the Dexter Robotic Surgery System: Initial Experiences in Cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

The use of surgical robots in minimally invasive visceral surgery is increasing, with new platforms like the Dexter Robotic System. This study evaluated the implementation of Dexter in a general visceral surgery department, focusing on safety, performance, and surgeon stress in elective cholecystectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three surgeons with varying laparoscopic and robotic experience performed robotic cholecystectomies with Dexter between December 2022 and June 2024. Perioperative outcomes and safety data were collected until 30 days post-surgery. Surgeons' stress load and physical discomfort were assessed using validated questionnaires (SMEQ, STAI, and LED).

RESULTS

Fifty-nine patients underwent elective gallbladder removal. Median age was 52 years (range 27-85) and BMI 26.3 kg/m2 (range 18.3-41.2). All surgeries were completed robotically without conversion to open surgery. There were no intraoperative complications or device deficiencies. Two cases were converted to laparoscopy due to patient anatomy and a liver tumor discovery. One postoperative complication (Clavien-Dindo grade 3A) involved choledocholithiasis requiring ERCP. Median total operating time, docking time, and console use time were 60 min (IQR 50-78), 5 min (IQR 4-7), and 23 min (IQR 19-34), respectively. Operative times revealed a fast-learning experience, stabilizing after 10-15 cases. Surgeons reported high comfort (LED Median 3, IQR 0-6) and low stress (SMEQ median 10, IQR 10-26.25).

CONCLUSION

The Dexter system was safely implemented in clinical practice, with efficient learning curve and low perceived stress, even for surgeons without prior robotic experience. Further studies are needed to determine whether Dexter offers advantages over conventional techniques.

Clinical Outcomes and Costs of Robotic-assisted vs Conventional Mitral Valve Repair: A National Analysis

BACKGROUND

Robotic approaches have been increasingly utilized for cardiothoracic operations, though concerns regarding costs remain. We evaluated short-term outcomes and costs of robotic-assisted and conventional mitral valve repair (MV-repair), hypothesizing that cost differences would be mitigated at high-volume programs.

METHODS

Adults undergoing elective MV-repair from 2016 to 2020 were identified in the Nationwide Readmissions Database. Patients with rheumatic heart disease, mitral stenosis, and those undergoing concomitant operations were excluded. Generalized linear models were utilized to evaluate the association between approach and in-hospital mortality, complications, length of stay, costs, and 90-day readmissions. Annual institutional MV-repair volume was modeled using restricted cubic splines, and cost differences subsequently evaluated by volume tertile.

RESULTS

Of 40,738 patients, 9.8% underwent robotic-assisted MV-repair. Risk-adjusted outcomes including mortality, stroke, reoperation, respiratory complications, postoperative infection, and readmission were comparable between the 2 groups, while those undergoing robotic-assisted MV-repair had lower rates of nonhome discharge. The median cost of robotic-assisted MV-repair was greater than conventional surgery ($46,800 vs $38,500, P < .001). Despite a 1.3-day decrement (95% CI, 1.1-1.6) in length of stay, robotic-assisted MV-repair was associated with greater risk-adjusted costs by $10,500 (95% CI, $5800-$15,200). Programs in the highest volume tertile exhibited comparable costs for robotic-assisted and conventional MV-repair (cost difference, $5900; 95% CI, -$1200 to $12,200; P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic-assisted MV-repair had comparable short-term outcomes relative to conventional surgery. Despite increased costs of robotic-assisted MV-repair overall, high-volume programs had similar risk-adjusted costs by approach. These findings support the designation and performance of robotic MV-repair at centers of excellence in the United States.

Impact of the robotic platform and surgeon variation on cholecystectomy disposable costs-More is not better

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized that surgeon variation in equipment and platform during cholecystectomy would increase costs without measurable benefit.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all cholecystectomies from a large health care system. Using a mixed model, we modeled disposable instrument costs and outcomes. Independent variables included patient, hospital, surgeon factors and the surgical platform.

RESULTS

From 2017 to 2024, we analyzed 13,548 laparoscopic cholecystectomies and 1,258 robotic cholecystectomies performed by 98 surgeons across 14 hospitals. The proportion of robotic cholecystectomy usage increased from 0.1% in 2017 to 26% (522 of 2021) in 2024. The unadjusted disposable cost (mean, median, and the 25th percentile) was $669 ± $4.2, $534, and $448 for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and $1,447 ± $18, $1,309, and $1,120 for robotic cholecystectomy, respectively. The cheapest surgeon's mean cost was $272 ± $37 (n = 16), and the most expensive was $1,934 ± $108 (n = 223), both laparoscopic only. For robotic cholecystectomies, the least costly surgeon averaged $1,062 ± $23 (n = 52). Using our mixed models, robotic cholecystectomy was on average $817 ± $22 more expensive than laparoscopic cholecystectomy (P < .001); there was no meaningful difference in mean operating room times, readmission rates, length of stay, or 30-day reintervention rate between surgical platforms. However, robotic cholecystectomies predicted a substantially lower conversion rate (odds ratio: 0.20 ± 0.11, P = .004) or $93,000 per conversion prevented. If all surgeons operated at the 25th percentile of a platform's mean cost, a potential disposal equipment savings of 35% for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and 24% for robotic cholecystectomy could be realized.

CONCLUSION

Robotic cholecystectomy costs were 2.5 times greater than those for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. In addition, surgeons' disposable equipment choices also substantially impact cholecystectomy costs. Neither platform nor excess costs provide any substantial measurable outcome benefit.

Implementation of robotic and laparoscopic hepatopancreatobiliary surgery in low- and middle-income settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite numerous barriers, the application of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) conditions has been increasing globally. This study aims to review the current status of HPB MIS in LMICs.

METHODS

Relevant databases were searched, identifying 3452 publications, 38 of which met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of outcomes was carried out using "R" statistical software.

RESULTS

This study reviewed reports of application of MIS for HPB conditions in LMICs, analyzing a total of 3272 procedures. India (66.87 %) and Egypt (20.11 %) contributed majorly to the procedures reviewed. Others were from Indonesia (8.68 %), Colombia (3.06 %), Pakistan (0.67 %), Sri Lanka (0.34 %), Trinidad and Tobago (0.18 %), and Nigeria (0.09 %). India was the only LMIC with robotic HPB MIS. The majority of the procedures were biliary (74.88 %). Basic procedures accounted for 55.63 %, while 44.37 % were advanced. The overall conversion rate and prevalence of morbidity were 8 % [95 % CI: 5; 13], and 15 % [95 % CI: 9; 22], respectively. Robotics was associated with higher conversion (14 % vs 6 %, p < 0.01) but lower morbidity (10 % vs 16 %, p = 0.91), compared to laparoscopic surgery. There were 5 cases of mortality from laparoscopy.

CONCLUSION

The outcomes in this systematic review, compared to findings in other settings indicate successful implementation of HPB MIS in LMICs.

Patient Complexity and Bile Duct Injury After Robotic-Assisted vs Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Importance

Recent evidence suggests higher bile duct injury rates for patients undergoing robotic-assisted cholecystectomy compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Proponents of the robotic-assisted approach contend that this may be due to selection of higher-risk and more complex patients being offered robotic-assisted cholecystectomy.

Objective

To evaluate the comparative safety of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy among patients with varying levels of risk for adverse postoperative outcomes.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study assessed fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged 66 to 99 years who underwent cholecystectomy between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2021. Data analysis was performed between June and August 2024. Medicare beneficiaries were separated into model training and experimental cohorts (60% and 40%, respectively). Random forest modeling and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator techniques were then used in a risk model training cohort to stratify beneficiaries based on their risk of a composite outcome of postoperative adverse events consisting of 90-day postoperative complications, serious complications, reoperations, and rehospitalization in an independent experimental cohort.

Exposures

Robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome of interest was bile duct injury requiring operative intervention after cholecystectomy. Secondary outcomes were composite outcomes from cholecystectomy composed of any complications, serious complications, reoperations, and readmissions.

Results

A total of 737 908 individuals (mean [SD] age, 74.7 [9.9] years; 387 563 [52.5%] female) were included, with 295 807 in an experimental cohort and 442 101 in a training cohort. Bile duct injury was higher among patients undergoing robotic-assisted compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy in each subgroup (low-risk group: relative risk [RR], 3.14; 95% CI, 2.35-3.94; medium-risk group: RR, 3.13; 95% CI, 2.35-3.92; and high-risk group: RR, 3.11; 95% CI, 2.34-3.88). Overall, composite outcomes between the 2 groups were similar for robotic-assisted cholecystectomy compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.07-1.12), aside from reoperation, which was overall higher in the robotic-assisted group compared with the laparoscopic group (RR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.35-1.59).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries, bile duct injury rates were higher among low-, medium-, and high-risk surgical candidates after robotic-assisted cholecystectomy. These findings suggest that patient selection may not be the cause of differences in bile duct injury rates among patients undergoing robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Robotic versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Can they be compared? A narrative review and personal considerations disproving low-level evidence

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the gold standard for the treatment of symptomatic gallstones, acute cholecystitis, and acute gallstone pancreatitis. In recent years, the development and diffusion of robotic surgery have provided surgeons with the opportunity to apply this innovative approach to cholecystectomy, yielding interesting results. However, as with any new surgical technique, robotic cholecystectomy (RC) has met with skepticism within the surgical community. Beyond the understandable concerns regarding increased costs, some authors have claimed that RC is associated with a higher complication rate compared to LC. We reviewed the existing literature on this subject, discussing the limitations and strengths of the most significant publications and critically analyzing them. The analysis of the literature indicates that RC is safe and effective, with no definitive evidence of its inferiority compared to LC. Some of the published papers are of low quality and biased, even with significant sample sizes. Furthermore, we believe that comparing an established technique like LC with a new and not yet standardized one such as RC is somewhat illogical. RC represents a significant advance in minimally invasive surgery and should be viewed as an opportunity to familiarize oneself with the robotic device and to enhance the surgeon's skills in preparation for more complex robotic operations. The robotic approach can be beneficial in selected cases of cholecystectomy where fine dissection is required. With further reductions in costs, RC could become the future gold standard for benign gallbladder disorders.

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).

Analgesic and hemodynamic effects of two injection approaches of dexmedetomidine in elderly cholecystolithiasis patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a retrospective study of 150 patients

This retrospective study investigated the effects of three dexmedetomidine (Dex) injection approaches on analgesic and hemodynamics in elderly cholecystolithiasis patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The clinical data of 150 elderly patients with cholecystolithiasis were collected, and they were divided into the Dex A (n=50), Dex B (n=50), and Dex C (n=50) cohorts. Patient's heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were collected at T0, T1, and T2 for blood gas analysis. The difference in oxygen content between cerebral arterial and venous blood (Da-jvO2) was calculated. The duration of surgery, occurrence of cardiovascular and respiratory suppression, and the time of spontaneous respiratory recovery and extubation were recorded. At T2, T3, and T4, HR and MAP in the Dex C group were smaller than Dex A group and Dex B group (Dex C Collapse

Key Words

• Dexmedetomidine
• heart rate
• laparoscopic cholecystectomy
• mean arterial pressure
• propofol

Collapse

MESH Headings

• Humans
• Dexmedetomidine/administration & dosage
• Dexmedetomidine/pharmacology
• Aged
• Male
• Female
• Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic
• Hemodynamics/drug effects
• Retrospective Studies
• Cholecystolithiasis/surgery
• Aged, 80 and over
• Middle Aged
• Heart Rate/drug effects

Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Jing Zhu Department of anesthesiology, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Xi'an, China School of Clinical Medicine, Xi'an Medical University, Graduate School of Xi'an Medical University, Xi'an, China
Lijuan Zhu Department of anesthesiology, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Xi'an, China School of Clinical Medicine, Xi'an Medical University, Graduate School of Xi'an Medical University, Xi'an, China
Tao Kang Department of neurology, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Xi'an, China
Xin Li Department of anesthesiology, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Xi'an, China School of Clinical Medicine, Xi'an Medical University, Graduate School of Xi'an Medical University, Xi'an, China
Juan Wu Department of anesthesiology, Second Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China

Collapse

Collaborators Collapse

Analyzing the emergence of surgical robotics in Africa: a scoping review of pioneering procedures, platforms utilized, and outcome meta-analysis

Purpose

Surgical practice globally has undergone significant advancements with the advent of robotic systems. In Africa, a similar trend is emerging with the introduction of robots into various surgical specialties in certain countries. The need to review the robotic procedures performed, platforms utilized, and analyze outcomes such as conversion, morbidity, and mortality associated with robotic surgery in Africa, necessitated this study. This is the first study examining the status and outcomes of robotic surgery in Africa.

Methods

A thorough scoping search was performed in PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and African Journals Online. Of the 1,266 studies identified, 16 studies across 3 countries met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis conducted using R statistical software estimated the pooled prevalences with the 95% confidence interval (CI) of conversion, morbidity, and mortality.

Results

Surgical robots are reportedly in use in South Africa, Egypt, and Tunisia. Across four specialties, 1,328 procedures were performed using da Vinci (Intuitive Surgical), Versius (CMR Surgical), and Senhance (Asensus Surgical) surgical robotic platforms. Urological procedures (90.1%) were the major procedures performed, with robotic prostatectomy (49.3%) being the most common procedure. The pooled rate of conversion and prevalence of morbidity from the meta-analysis was 0.21% (95% CI, 0%-0.54%) and 21.15% (95% CI, 7.45%-34.85%), respectively. There was no reported case of mortality.

Conclusion

The outcomes highlight successful implementation and the potential for wider adoption. Based on our findings, we advocate for multidisciplinary and multinational collaboration, investment in surgical training programs, and policy initiatives aimed at addressing barriers to the widespread adoption of robotic surgery in Africa.

Association of severe obesity with risk of conversion to open in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis

Background

Obesity is a known risk factor for cholecystitis and is associated with technical complications during laparoscopic procedures. The present study seeks to assess the association between obesity class and conversion to open (CTO) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Methods

Adult acute cholecystitis patients with obesity undergoing non-elective LC were identified in the 2017-2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Patients were stratified by obesity class; class 1 (Body Mass Index [BMI] = 30.0-34.9), class 2 (BMI = 35.0-39.9), and class 3 (BMI ≥ 40.0). Multivariable regression models were developed to assess factors associated with CTO and its association with perioperative complications and resource utilization.

Results

Of 89,476 patients undergoing LC, 40.6 % had BMI ≥ 40.0. Before adjustment, class 3 obesity was associated with increased rates of CTO compared to class 1-2 (4.6 vs 3.8 %; p < 0.001). Following adjustment, class 3 remained associated with an increased likelihood of CTO (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] 1.45, 95 % Confidence Interval [CI] 1.31-1.61; ref.: class 1-2). Patients undergoing CTO had increased risk of blood transfusion (AOR 3.27, 95 % CI 2.54-4.22) and respiratory complications (AOR 1.36, 95 % CI 1.01-1.85). Finally, CTO was associated with incremental increases in hospitalization costs (β + $719, 95 % CI 538-899) and length of stay (LOS; β +2.20 days, 95 % CI 2.05-2.34).

Conclusions

Class 3 obesity is a significant risk factor for CTO. Moreover, CTO is associated with increased hospitalization costs and LOS. As the prevalence of obesity grows, improved understanding of operative risk by approach is required to optimize clinical outcomes. Our findings are relevant to shared decision-making and informed consent.

Current state of minimally invasive general surgical practice in Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the laparoscopic procedures performed and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery, including laparoscopy and robotics, has significantly improved general surgical (GS) practice globally. While robot-assisted GS practice is yet to be adopted in the majority of Africa, laparoscopy has been utilized to improve surgical outcomes. This study aims to review the laparoscopic GS procedures (LGSPs) performed and evaluate outcomes such as conversion to open surgery, morbidity, and mortality in Africa.

METHODS

Four databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, WoS, and AJOL) were searched, identifying 8022 publications. Following screening, 40 studies across Africa that reported LGSPs (n ≥ 2) performed and outcomes met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis conducted using R statistical software estimated the pooled prevalences with the 95% CI of conversion, morbidity, and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 6381 procedures performed in 15 African countries were analyzed in this study. Majority, 72.89%, of the procedures were performed in Senegal, South Africa, and Nigeria. The major procedures performed were cholecystectomy (37.09%), appendicectomy (33.36%), and diagnostic laparoscopy (9.98%). The meta-analysis revealed a conversion rate of 5% [95% CI: 4, 7]. Adhesion (28.13%), hemorrhage (16.67%), technical difficultly (12.50%), and equipment failure (11.46%) were the predominant indications for conversion. Surgical site infection (42.75%) was the major cause of morbidity. The prevalences of morbidity and mortality were 7% [95% CI: 5, 10] and 0.12% [95% CI: 0, 0.29], respectively.

CONCLUSION

A wide range of basic and advanced LGSPs were performed. The outcomes obtained indicate successful implementation of the laparoscopic approach. Importantly, this study serves as a foundational work for further research on minimally invasive surgery in Africa.

ROBOtic Care Outcomes Project for acute gallbladder pathology

BACKGROUND

Robotic cholecystectomy is being increasingly used for patients with acute gallbladder disease who present to the emergency department, but clinical evidence is limited. We aimed to compare the outcomes of emergent laparoscopic and robotic cholecystectomies in a large real-world database.

METHODS

Patients who received emergent laparoscopic or robotic cholecystectomies from 2020 to 2022 were identified from the Intuitive Custom Hospital Analytics database, based on deidentified extraction of electronic health record data from US hospitals. Conversion to open or subtotal cholecystectomy and complications were defined using ICD10 and/or CPT codes. Multivariate logistic regression with inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was performed to compare clinical outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic approach after balancing covariates. Cost analysis was performed with activity-based costing and adjustment for inflation.

RESULTS

Of 26,786 laparoscopic and 3,151 robotic emergent cholecystectomy patients being included, 64% were female, 60% were ≥45 years, and 24% were obese. Approximately 5.5% patients presented with pancreatitis, and 4% each presenting with sepsis and biliary obstruction. After IPTW, distributions of all baseline covariates were balanced. Robotic cholecystectomy decreased odds of conversion to open (odds ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-0.93; p = 0.035), but increased odds of subtotal cholecystectomy (odds ratio, 1.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.60; p = 0.037). Surgical site infection, readmission, length of stay, hospital acquired conditions, bile duct injury or leak, and hospital mortality were similar in both groups. There was no significant difference in hospital cost.

CONCLUSION

Robotic cholecystectomy has reduced odds of conversion to open and comparable complications, but increased odds of subtotal cholecystectomy compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute gallbladder diseases. Further work is required to assess the long-term implications of these differences.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Retrospective multi-center study of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy: after-hours surgery and business-hours surgery outcomes

The effect of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC), when performed after hours, on perioperative outcomes has not been evaluated against outcomes achieved during normal business hours. Subjects 18-80 years old who underwent da Vinci robotic-assisted cholecystectomy from August 2018 to February 2021 were included. Baseline and 30-day perioperative outcomes were retrospectively and consecutively collected and analyzed. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was performed to balance patient characteristics between groups. A weighted comparative analysis was followed. Outcomes from 505 patients (after hours, n = 169; business hours, n = 336) undergoing RAC across 5 U.S. medical institutions were analyzed. The higher rates of acute cholecystitis and gallbladder inflammation, gangrene, and intraoperative abnormalities in the after-hours group were associated with higher rates of urgent cases and longer operative times-but not increased complication rates-compared to the business-hours group. There were no significant differences in rates of intraoperative or postoperative complications, readmissions, or reoperations. Integrated da Vinci Firefly fluorescence imaging system was used extensively, and the critical view of safety was achieved in > 96% of cases in both groups. No conversions occurred in the after-hours group compared to four conversions in the business-hours group (p = 0.0266). After-hours patients had shorter outpatient lengths of stay. No mortalities were reported for either group (p = 0.0139). After-hours RAC with integrated da Vinci Firefly imaging performed by surgeons experienced in RAC is associated with similar or improved outcomes than the same procedures during business hours in terms of complications, conversions, readmissions, reoperations, and length of stay. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04551820; August 5, 2020.

Comparative Safety of Robotic-Assisted vs Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Importance

Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is rapidly being adopted into practice, partly based on the belief that it offers specific technical and safety advantages over traditional laparoscopic surgery. Whether robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is safer than laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains unclear.

Objective

To determine the uptake of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy and to analyze its comparative safety vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used Medicare administrative claims data for nonfederal acute care hospitals from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019. Participants included 1 026 088 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries 66 to 99 years of age who underwent cholecystectomy with continuous Medicare coverage for 3 months before and 12 months after surgery. Data were analyzed August 17, 2022, to June 1, 2023.

Exposure

Surgical technique used to perform cholecystectomy: robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic approaches.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was rate of bile duct injury requiring definitive surgical reconstruction within 1 year after cholecystectomy. Secondary outcomes were composite outcome of bile duct injury requiring less-invasive postoperative surgical or endoscopic biliary interventions, and overall incidence of 30-day complications. Multivariable logistic analysis was performed adjusting for patient factors and clustered within hospital referral regions. An instrumental variable analysis was performed, leveraging regional variation in the adoption of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy within hospital referral regions over time, to account for potential confounding from unmeasured differences between treatment groups.

Results

A total of 1 026 088 patients (mean [SD] age, 72 [12.0] years; 53.3% women) were included in the study. The use of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy increased 37-fold from 211 of 147 341 patients (0.1%) in 2010 to 6507 of 125 211 patients (5.2%) in 2019. Compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy, robotic-assisted cholecystectomy was associated with a higher rate of bile duct injury necessitating a definitive operative repair within 1 year (0.7% vs 0.2%; relative risk [RR], 3.16 [95% CI, 2.57-3.75]). Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy was also associated with a higher rate of postoperative biliary interventions, such as endoscopic stenting (7.4% vs 6.0%; RR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.16-1.33]). There was no significant difference in overall 30-day complication rates between the 2 procedures. The instrumental variable analysis, which was designed to account for potential unmeasured differences in treatment groups, also showed that robotic-assisted cholecystectomy was associated with a higher rate of bile duct injury (0.4% vs 0.2%; RR, 1.88 [95% CI, 1.14-2.63]).

Conclusions and Relevance

This cohort study's finding of significantly higher rates of bile duct injury with robotic-assisted cholecystectomy compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy suggests that the utility of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy should be reconsidered, given the existence of an already minimally invasive, predictably safe laparoscopic approach.

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.

Retrospective analysis of operative time and time to discharge for laparoscopic vs robotic approaches to appendectomy and cholecystectomy

Robotic-assisted appendectomies and cholecystectomies are believed to increase cost compared to the gold standard laparoscopic approach. Two equally qualified surgeons performed both approaches over 2 years to evaluate intraoperative duration, time to discharge, conversion to open procedure, and readmission within 30 days. 110 laparoscopic, 81 robotic-assisted appendectomies; and 105 laparoscopic and 165 robotic-assisted cholecystectomies were performed. Intraoperative time; laparoscopic appendectomy was 1.402 vs 1.3615 h for robotic-assisted (P value = 0.304); laparoscopic cholecystectomy was 1.692 vs 1.634 h for robotic-assisted (P value = 0.196). Time to discharge, was 38.26 for laparoscopic vs 28.349 h for robotic-assisted appendectomy (P value = 0.010), and 35.95 for laparoscopic vs 28.46 h for robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (P value = 0.002). Intraoperative conversion to open; only laparoscopic procedures were converted, one appendectomy and nine cholecystectomies. None in the robotic-assisted procedures. Readmissions, none in the appendectomy group and three in the cholecystectomy group. One laparoscopic and two robotic-assisted cholecystectomy patients were readmitted. Intraoperative times for robotic appendectomy and cholecystectomy were not longer than laparoscopic approach. Robotic approach shortened the time to discharge and the likelihood for conversion to open procedure.

Robot-assisted cholecystectomy with the new HUGO™ robotic-assisted system: first worldwide report with system description, docking settings, and video

Robotic surgery has gained worldwide acceptance in the past decade, and several studies have shown that this technique is safe and feasible. The innovation of this system is the open surgical console with an HD-3D display, a system tower, and four independent arm carts. We describe the first robot-assisted cholecystectomy performed with the new Hugo RAS (robotic-assisted surgery) system (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) in Spain. The procedure was completed without conversion. No intraoperative complication or technical failure of the system was recorded. The operative time was 70 min. The docking time was 3 min. Hospital length of stay was 1 days. This case report shows the safety and feasibility of cholecystectomy with the Hugo RAS system and provides relevant data that may be of help to early adopters of this surgical platform.

Major iatrogenic bile duct injury during elective cholecystectomy: a Czech population register-based study

PURPOSE

Bile duct injury (BDI) remains the most serious complication following cholecystectomy. However, the actual incidence of BDI in the Czech Republic remains unknown. Hence, we aimed to identify the incidence of major BDI requiring operative reconstruction after elective cholecystectomy in our region despite the prevailing modern 4 K Ultra HD laparoscopy and Critical View of Safety (CVS) standards implemented in daily surgical practice among the Czech population.

METHODS

In the absence of a specific registry for BDI, we analysed data from The Czech National Patient Register of Reimbursed Healthcare Services, where all procedures are mandatorily recorded. We investigated 76,345 patients who were enrolled for at least a year and underwent elective cholecystectomy during the period from 2018-2021. In this cohort, we examined the incidence of major BDI following the reconstruction of the biliary tract and other complications.

RESULTS

A total of 76,345 elective cholecystectomies were performed during the study period, and 186 major BDIs were registered (0.24%). Most elective cholecystectomies were performed laparoscopically (84.7%), with the remaining open (15.3%). The incidence of BDI was higher in the open surgery group (150 BDI/11700 cases/1.28%) than in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (36 BDI/64645 cases/0.06%). Furthermore, the total hospital stays with BDI after reconstruction was 13.6 days. However, the majority of laparoscopic elective cholecystectomies (57,914, 89.6%) were safe and standard procedures with no complications.

CONCLUSION

Our study corroborates the findings of previous nationwide studies. Therefore, though laparoscopic cholecystectomy is reliable, the risks of BDI cannot be eliminated.

National analysis of cost disparities in robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic abdominal operations

BACKGROUND

Although the use of robotic-assisted surgery continues to expand, the cost-effectiveness of this platform remains unclear. The present study aimed to compare hospitalization costs and clinical outcomes between robotic-assisted surgery and laparoscopic approaches for major abdominal operations.

METHODS

All adults receiving minimally invasive gastrectomy, cholecystectomy, colectomy (right, left, transverse, sigmoid), ventral hernia repair, hysterectomy, and abdominoperineal resection were identified in the 2012 to 2019 National Inpatient Sample. Records with concurrent operations were excluded. Multivariable linear and logistic regressions were developed to examine the association of the operative approach with costs, length of stay, and complications. An interaction term between the year and operative approach was used to analyze cost differences over time.

RESULTS

Of an estimated 1,124,450 patients, 75.8% had laparoscopic surgery, and 24.2% had robotic-assisted surgery. Compared to laparoscopic, patients with robotic-assisted operations were younger and more commonly privately insured. The average hospitalization cost for laparoscopic cases was $16,000 ± 14,800 and robotic-assisted cases was $18,300 ± 13,900 (P < .001). Regardless of procedure type, all robotic-assisted operations had higher costs compared to laparoscopic operations. Risk-adjusted trend analysis revealed that the discrepancy in costs between laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgery persisted and widened over time from $1,600 in 2012 to $2,600 in 2019. Compared to laparoscopic procedures, robotic procedures had a 2.2% reduction in complications (9.4 vs 11.6%, P < .001) and a 0.7-day decrement in the length of stay (95% confidence interval -0.8 to -0.7).

CONCLUSION

Disparities in costs between robotic and laparoscopic abdominal operations have persisted over time. Given the modest decrement in adverse outcomes, further investigation into the clinical benefits of robotic surgery is warranted to justify its greater costs.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of robotic cholecystectomy in the treatment of benign gallbladder disease

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the current standard of care treatment for benign gallbladder disease. Robotic cholecystectomy is another approach for performing cholecystectomy that offers a surgeon better dexterity and visualization. However, robotic cholecystectomy may increase cost without sufficient evidence to suggest an improvement in clinical outcomes. The purpose of this study was to construct a decision tree model to compare cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and robotic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

Complication rates and effectiveness associated with robotic cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy over a 1-year time frame were compared using a decision tree model populated with data from the published literature. Cost was calculated using Medicare data. Effectiveness was represented by quality-adjusted life-years. The primary outcome of the study was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, which compares the cost per quality-adjusted life-year of the 2 interventions. The willingness-to-pay threshold was set at $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year. Results were confirmed with 1-way, 2-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses varying branch-point probabilities.

RESULTS

The studies used in our analysis included 3,498 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 1,833 patients who underwent robotic cholecystectomy, and 392 patients who required conversion to open cholecystectomy. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy produced 0.9722 quality-adjusted life-years, costing $9,370.06. Robotic cholecystectomy produced an additional 0.0017 quality-adjusted life-years at an additional $3,013.64. These results equate to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1,795,735.21/quality-adjusted life-year. This exceeds the willingness-to-pay threshold, making laparoscopic cholecystectomy the more cost-effective strategy. Sensitivity analyses did not alter results.

CONCLUSION

Traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the more cost-effective treatment modality for benign gallbladder disease. At present, robotic cholecystectomy is not able to improve clinical outcomes enough to justify its added cost.

The impact of disclosure of conflicts of interest in studies comparing robot-assisted and laparoscopic cholecystectomies-a persistent problem

INTRODUCTION

Accurate disclosure of conflicts of interest (COI) is critical to interpretation of study results, especially when industry interests are involved. We reviewed published manuscripts comparing robot-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) to evaluate the relationship between COI disclosures and conclusions drawn on the procedure benefits and safety profile.

METHODS

Searching Pubmed and Embase using key words "cholecystectomy", laparoscopic" and "robotic"/"robot-assisted" retrieved 345 publications. Manuscripts that compared benefits and safety of RAC over LC, had at least one US author and were published between 2014 and 2020 enabling verification of disclosures with reported industry payments in CMS's Open Payments database (OPD) (up to 1 calendar year prior to publication) were included in the analysis (n = 37).

RESULTS

Overall, 26 (70%) manuscripts concluded that RAC was equivalent or better than LC (RAC +) and 11 (30%) concluded that RAC was inferior to LC (RAC-). Six manuscripts (5 RAC + and 1 RAC-) did not have clearly stated COI disclosures. Among those that had disclosure statements, authors' disclosures matched OPD records among 17 (81%) of RAC + and 9 (90%) RAC- papers. All 11 RAC- and 17 RAC + (65%) manuscripts were based on retrospective cohort studies. The remaining RAC + papers were based on case studies/series (n = 4), literature review (n = 4) and clinical trial (n = 1). A higher proportion of RAC + (85% vs 45% RAC-) manuscripts used data from a single institution. Authors on RAC + papers received higher amounts of industry payments on average compared to RAC- papers.

CONCLUSIONS

It is imperative for authors to understand and accurately disclose their COI while disseminating scientific output. Journals have the responsibility to use a publicly available resource like the OPD to verify authors' disclosures prior to publication to protect the process of scientific authorship which is the foundation of modern surgical care.

The effectiveness of extremely low-pressure pneumoperitoneum on pain reduction after robot-assisted cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

The robot-assisted cholecystectomy could provide a sufficient surgical field with the extremely low-pressure pneumoperitoneum (ELPP; 4 mmHg) by the robot arm lifting the abdominal wall upward. This study aimed to investigate the effect of ELPP on the postoperative outcomes in benign gallbladder disease.

METHODS

A retrospective study was designed to compare the postoperative pain in addition with operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and complication of three types of cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease: 75 ELPP single site robot-assisted cholecystectomy (SSRC), 114 standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum (SPP) SSRC and 110 SPP conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC).

RESULTS

There was no difference in whole operation time between ELPP SSRC and SPP SSRC group (p = 0.159). Postoperative pain score was significantly less in ELPP SSRC group as compared to SPP SSRC or SPP CLC group at 6, 12, and 24 h postoperatively (p = 0.004, p = 0.004, and p = 0.013 respectively). The incidence of shoulder pain was also significantly lower in ELPP SSRC group (p < 0.001). The rate of postoperative complication and length of stay were not different among the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that ELPP technique using robot is feasible without increasing postoperative complications in the process of cholecystectomy and the use of the ELPP can reduce postoperative pain and shoulder pain compared to the use of the SPP.

Robotic Hiatal Hernia Repair Associated with Higher Morbidity and Readmission Rates Compared to Laparoscopic Repair: 10-Year Analysis from the National Readmissions Database (NRD)

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic techniques have been used for hiatal hernia repair. Robotic-assisted repairs have been increasingly used with unproven benefits. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes between laparoscopic and robotic-assisted hiatal hernia repair.

METHODS

The Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) was used to identify hospitalizations for laparoscopic or robotic hiatal hernia repair from 2010 to 2019. Primary outcomes included post-operative complications and 30- and 90-day readmission rates. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital death, length of stay, and inflation-adjusted hospital cost. Multivariable models were estimated for overall complication and readmission rates.

RESULTS

Approximately 517,864 hospitalizations met inclusion criteria with 11.3% including robotic repairs. Robotic repair was associated with a higher overall complication rate (9.2% vs. 6.8%, odds ratio [OR]: 1.4, 95% CI: 1.3-1.5, p < .001); however, the trend showed more similar complication rates across years. The higher overall complication rate remained after adjusting for patient and facility characteristics (adjusted OR [aOR]: 1.3, 95% CI: 1.2-1.4, p < .001). Robotic repairs were associated with higher 30-day (6.1% vs. 7.4%, aOR: 1.2, 95% CI: 1.2-1.3, p < .001) and 90-day readmission rates (9.4% vs. 11.2%, aOR: 1.2, 95% CI: 1.2-1.3, p < .001). In-hospital mortality and length of stay were similar, although, higher hospital costs were associated with robotic repairs. Both complications and readmission rates were lower as annual procedural volume increased.

CONCLUSION

Robotic repairs had higher unadjusted and adjusted complication and readmission rates. The overall complication rate has shown a trend towards improvement which may be a result of increasing experience with robotic surgery.

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.

Trends in Robot-Assisted Procedures for General Surgery in the Veterans Health Administration

INTRODUCTION

Implementation of robot-assisted procedures is growing. Utilization within the country's largest healthcare network, the Veterans Health Administration, is unclear.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study using data from the Department of Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse from January 2015 through December 2019. Trends in robot utilization for cholecystectomy, ventral hernia repair, and inguinal hernia repair were characterized nationally and regionally by Veterans Integrated Services Network. Patients, who underwent laparoscopic repairs for these procedures and open hernia repairs, were included to determine proportion performed robotically.

RESULTS

We identified 119,191 patients, of which 5689 (4.77%) received a robotic operation. The proportion of operations performed robotically increased from 1.49% to 10.55% (7.08-fold change; slope, 2.14% per year; 95% confidence interval [0.79%, 3.49%]). Ventral hernia repair had the largest growth in robotic procedures (1.51% to 13.94%; 9.23-fold change; slope, 2.86% per year; 95% confidence interval [1.04%, 4.68%]). Regions with the largest increase in robotic utilization were primarily along the Northeast, Midwest, and West Coast.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot utilization in general surgery is increasing at different rates across the United States in the Veterans Health Administration. Future studies should investigate the regional disparities and drivers of this approach.

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.

Surgical strategies for Mirizzi syndrome: A ten-year single center experience

BACKGROUND

Mirizzi syndrome (MS) remains a challenging biliary disease, and its low rate of preoperative diagnosis should be resolved. Moreover, technological advances have not resulted in decisive improvements in the surgical treatment of MS. Complex bile duct lesions due to MS make surgery difficult, especially when the laparoscopic approach is adopted. The safety and long-term effect of MS treatment need to be guaranteed in terms of preoperative diagnosis and surgical strategy.

AIM

To analyze preoperative diagnostic methods and the safety, effectiveness, prognosis and related factors of surgical strategies for different types of MS.

METHODS

The clinical data of MS patients who received surgical treatment from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with malignancies, choledochojejunal fistula, lack of data and lost to follow-up were excluded. According to preoperative imaging examination records and documented intraoperative findings, the clinical types of MS were determined using the Csendes classification. The safety, effectiveness and long-term prognosis of surgical treatment in different types of MS, and their interactions with the clinical characteristics of patients were summarized.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients with MS were included (34 males and 32 females). Magnetic resonance imaging/magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRI/MRCP) showed specific imaging features of MS in 58 cases (87.9%), which was superior to ultrasound scan (USS) in the diagnosis of MS and more sensitive to subtle biliary lesions than USS. The overall laparoscopic surgery completion rate was 53.03% (35/66), where the completion rates of MS type I, II and III were 69.05% (29/42), 42.86% (6/14) and zero (0/10), respectively. Thirty-one patients (46.97%) underwent laparotomy or conversion to laparotomy including 11 cases of iatrogenic bile duct injury which occurred in type I patients, and 25 of these patients underwent bile duct exploration, repair and T-tube drainage. In addition, 25 patients underwent intraoperative choledochoscopy and T-tube cholangiography. Overall, 21 cases (31.8%) were repaired by simple suturing, and 14 cases (21.2%) were repaired using the remaining gallbladder wall patch in the subtotal cholecystectomy. The ascendant of the Csendes classification types led to an increase in surgical complexity reflected by increased operation time, bleeding volume and cost. Gender, acute abdominal pain and measurable stone size had no effect on Csendes type of MS or final surgical approach. Age had no effect on the classification of MS, but it influenced the final surgical approach, hospital stay and cost. A total of 66 patients obtained a relatively high preoperative diagnostic rate and underwent surgery safely without serious complications, and no mortality was observed during the follow-up period of 36.5 ± 26.5 mo (range 13-76, median 22 mo).

CONCLUSION

MRI/MRCP can improve the preoperative diagnosis of MS. The Csendes classification can reflect the difficulty of treatment. The surgical strategies including laparoscopic surgery for MS should be formulated based on full evaluation and selection.

Racial disparities in surgical management and outcomes of acute limb ischemia in the United States

Background

Although significant racial disparities in the surgical management of lower extremity critical limb threatening ischemia have been previously reported, data on disparities in lower extremity acute limb ischemia are lacking.

Methods

The 2012–2018 National Inpatient Sample was queried for all adult hospitalizations for acute limb ischemia (N = 225,180). Hospital-specific observed-to-expected rates of major lower extremity amputation were tabulated. Multivariable logistic and linear models were developed to assess the impact of race on amputation and revascularization.

Results

Nonwhite race was associated with significantly increased odds of overall (adjusted odds ratio: 1.16, 95% confidence interval 1.06–1.28) and primary (adjusted odds ratio: 1.34, 95% confidence interval 1.17–1.53) major amputation, decreased odds of revascularization (adjusted odds ratio 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.73–0.85), but decreased in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio: 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.74–0.99). The nonwhite group incurred increased adjusted index hospitalization costs (β: +$4,810, 95% confidence interval 3,280-6,350), length of stay (β: + 1.09 days, 95% confidence interval 0.70–1.48), and nonhome discharge (adjusted odds ratio: 1.15, 95% confidence interval 1.06–1.26).

Conclusion

Significant racial disparities exist in the management of and outcomes of lower extremity acute limb ischemia despite correction for variations in hospital amputation practices and other relevant hospital and patient characteristics. Whether the etiology lies primarily in patient, institution, or healthcare provider–specific factors has not yet been determined. Further studies of race-based disparities in management and outcomes of acute limb ischemia are warranted to provide effective and equitable care to all.

Continued Relevance of Minimum Volume Standards for Elective Esophagectomy: A National Perspective

BACKGROUND

Despite minimum volume recommendations, the majority of esophagectomies are performed at centers with fewer than 20 annual cases. The present study examined the impact of institutional esophagectomy volume on in-hospital mortality, complications and resource use following esophageal resection.

METHODS

The 2010-2018 Nationwide Readmissions Database was queried to identify all adult patients undergoing esophagectomy for malignancy. Hospitals were categorized as high-volume (HVH) if performing at least 20 esophagectomies annually, and low-volume (LVH) if fewer. Multivariable models were developed to study the impact of volume on outcomes of interest which included in-hospital mortality, complications, duration of hospitalization (LOS), inflation adjusted costs, readmissions, and non-home discharge.

RESULTS

Of an estimated 23,176 hospitalizations, 45.6% occurred at HVH. Incidence of esophagectomy increased significantly along with median institutional case load over the study period, while the proportion on hospitals considered HVH remained steady at approximately 7.4%. After adjusting for relevant patient and hospital characteristics, HVH was associated with decreased mortality (AOR=0.65), LOS (β=-1.83 days), pneumonia (AOR=0.69), prolonged ventilation (AOR=0.50), sepsis (AOR=0.80), and tracheostomy (AOR=0.66), but increased odds of non-home discharge (AOR=1.56, all P<0.01), with LVH as reference.

CONCLUSIONS

Many clinical outcomes of esophagectomy are improved with no increment in costs when performed at centers with an annual caseload of at least 20, as recommended by patient advocacy organizations. These findings suggest that centralization of esophageal resections to high-volume centers may be congruent with value-based care models.

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.

Does near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography with indocyanine green reduce bile duct injuries and conversions to open surgery during laparoscopic or robotic cholecystectomy? - A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bile duct injury and conversion-to-open-surgery rates remain unacceptably high during laparoscopic and robotic cholecystectomy. In a recently published randomized clinical trial, using near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography with indocyanine green intraoperatively markedly enhanced biliary-structure visualization. Our systematic literature review compares bile duct injury and conversion-to-open-surgery rates in patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic cholecystectomy with versus without near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography.

METHODS

A thorough PubMed search was conducted to identify randomized clinical trials and nonrandomized clinical trials with ≥100 patients. Because all near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography studies were published since 2013, only studies without near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography published since 2013 were included for comparison. Incidence estimates, weighted and unweighted for study size, were adjusted for acute versus chronic cholecystitis, and for robotic versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy and are reported as events/10,000 patients. All studies were assessed for bias risk and high-risk studies excluded.

RESULTS

In total, 4,990 abstracts were reviewed, identifying 5 near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography studies (3 laparoscopic cholecystectomy/2 robotic cholecystectomy; n = 1,603) and 11 not near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography studies (5 laparoscopic cholecystectomy/4 robotic cholecystectomy/2 both; n = 5,070) for analysis. Overall weighted rates for bile duct injury and conversion were 6 and 16/10,000 in near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography patients versus 25 and 271/10,000 in patients without near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography. Among patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, bile duct injuries, and conversion rates among near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography versus patients without near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography were 0 and 23/10,000 versus 32 and 255/10,000, respectively. Bile duct injury rates were low with robotic cholecystectomy with and without near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography (12 and 8/10,000), but there was a marked reduction in conversions with near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography (12 vs 322/10,000).

CONCLUSION

Although large comparative trials remain necessary, preliminary analysis suggests that using near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography with indocyanine green intraoperatively sizably decreases bile duct injury and conversion-to-open-surgery rates relative to cholecystectomy under white light alone.