The Great Debate: Robotic vs Traditional Surgical Approach in the Acute Care Setting

Robotic surgery was first introduced in the 1980s as a system to aid patients in the battlefield. Since then, robotic surgery has become an important minimally invasive tool and plays an important role in elective surgery among various surgical specialties. However, the role for robotic surgery in the emergent setting is not well established or studied. Robotic surgery has been shown to be advantageous to both patients and operating surgeons. Though limited, studies have found robotic surgery in the acute setting to be safe for patients. These studies found robotic surgery to have improved perioperative outcomes when compared to an open or laparoscopic approach. Additionally, the robotic platform is thought to be an effective tool to prevent conversion to open procedures in emergent settings. Although some studies demonstrate advantages to robotic acute surgery, others have shown increased complications with robotic acute surgery or no distinct advantage when comparing robotic to laparoscopic surgery. Additionally, some of the published papers supporting the use of robotic surgery in the emergent setting may have a degree of bias favoring the robotic platform. Robotic surgery is a mainstay in minimally invasive elective surgery and gaining popularity among patients and surgeons. There are pros and cons to the adaptation of the robotic platform in the acute care setting. Additional large population studies are indicated to determine the true role of the robotic platform in the emergent setting.

Cirrhosis following single anastomosis duodeno-ileal switch: A case report

•

We report a rare case of a liver cirrhosis in a patient who underwent single anastomosis duodenal switch procedure.

•

We describe the possible presentation of the patient with a liver cirrhosis.

•

Management of single anastomosis duodenal switch patients should include close monitoring of liver function.

Introduction

Single anastomosis duodeno-ileal switch (SADI-S) involves a single, loop duodeno-ileal anastomosis with omission of the traditional Roux-en-Y distal ileo-ileal anastomosis. Not much has been published on the complications of SADI-S.

Presentation of case

The patient is a 40 year-old male who underwent robot-assisted SADI-S three years prior. At the time of surgery, his body mass index (BMI) was 69 kg/m². His BMI was 31 kg/m² at the time of presentation. Computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis showed a liver with a nodular appearance and moderate ascites throughout the abdomen and above the liver. Liver function showed AST 73 U/L, ALT 63 U/L, alkaline phosphatase 128 U/L, bilirubin 1.0 mg/dL, and albumin 2.8 g/dL. He underwent diagnostic and therapeutic paracentesis with removal of 6L of fluid that was negative for infection or malignant cells. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy showed grade I esophageal varices and diffuse mild gastritis.

Discussion

Mild hepatic dysfunction is common after biliopancreatic diversion and usually manifests as a temporary rise in liver enzymes that peak several months after surgery and normalize by one year. Cirrhosis and liver failure are rare sequelae that may develop at any time after surgery. Potential mechanisms include the absorption of hepatotoxic compounds from the bypassed small intestine in the context of bacterial overgrowth, protein malnutrition, and excessive free fatty acid mobilization causing steatosis and oxidative damage to hepatocytes.

Conclusion

Close laboratory monitoring is important after SADI-S in order to detect worsening hepatic dysfunction, which may occur many years after the surgery in the absence of other etiologies for liver failure.